if americans start growing hands instead of feets.

[76561198836691314]

will they finally roll back to metric system?

[Ulfrinn]

Messaggio originale di Tonepoet:

Messaggio originale di Ulfrinn:

Metric system is only a means to an end. No more accurate, no less arbitrary, merely different. Since there's nothing inherently better about it, there's no reason to actually switch to it.

There are some things that are better about it. You don't have to remember that three barleycorns is an inch and twelve inches is a foot and that three feet is a yard or 1760 yards in a mile. It's all done in multiple of tens, like or decimal counting system. It makes the mathematics of measurement scale conversion a little bit more straightforward.

Messaggio originale di Ulfrinn:

It's no different than a meter. How do you measure a meter? Probably with a ruler or tape measure. But what exactly is a meter? It's defined as the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458 of a second. If that isn't arbitrary AF, I don't know what is. And no person can even measure the distance light travels in that small of a fraction of a second, so it's completely meaningless. There's no logic behind the meter at all.

That's because scientists can't keep well enough alone and keep wanting to redefine things to be more precise instead of leaving well enough alone. The original definition was one ten millionth of the distance from the equator to the north pole.[en.wikipedia.org] Thing is, that can change in theory 'cause the earth is a bunch of packed together dirt that can sift.

And do you think remembering a few extremely basic units is difficult? Are you suggesting non Americans struggle with basic math? Btw, base 12 is a better system than base 10. Base 12 divides by more units than 10 does. For example, a third of 1 foot is 4 inches. What's a third of a meter? .33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333.

The description of a meter was changed to fit an otherwise arbitrary unit. If I wanted to measure an inch as the distance light travels in 1/xxxxxxxxxxxxx of a second, I can do that. But it doesn't make the measurement any more or less valid.

[❤ Sly Succubus ❤]

Messaggio originale di HIS DIVINE SHADOW:

Messaggio originale di Nepgineer Gaming:

That has nothing to do with military might mate as I hate to break it to you despite China have a seemingly sizable army, their not even in the running 10 nations with the strongest military army despite being both a 1st world power and ancient, the US only has the head in military technology, Russia has the lead in actual man power.

What you deem as weak means nothing when their status has not changed by having more troops then the US does

ok, you can see that russia is loosing to ukraine. whose army was 1\10 of russia? maybe less.
if not, then you will see.
and what you saying is absurd, did you ever meet their "man power"? it is a great example of man weakness and degeneracy, lol.

I don't need to, again what you deem as civil means nothing when it comes to a military, its a military, not a civil service, weakness or degeneracy or even nazism within their ranks means literally nothing when they have more troops then the US, you can take that fact or leave it, I don't care either way but as one in the US I hate to inform you that we do not have the most troops on the planet regardless of the number Russia lost.

Again your trying to compare military might to imperial/US/international measurements, people don't do it for a reason, mainly because it leads to stupid fighting between people because they refuse to accept that the numbers are already clear.

Hell like right now Russia has more active nuclear weapons then the United States, however the United States has more active nuclear missiles outside of their territory then Russia, which to most means nothing unless you ask people who understand what Strategic Importance is

[76561198836691314]

quality of troops matters...

[Masque]

Messaggio originale di L1qu1dator:

Messaggio originale di Ulfrinn:

Metric system is only a means to an end. No more accurate, no less arbitrary, merely different. Since there's nothing inherently better about it, there's no reason to actually switch to it.

How many inches there are in a yard? Who knows...
How many milimeters in a meter? It's in the name - 1000.
Do you have any smaller unit than an inch btw?

Yes. Anyone in construction, or mechanics, think easily in terms of 32nds, sixteenths, eighths, quarter, and half-inches.

The trouble I have with metric length measurement, and many in construction do, is that there is nothing between centimeter and meter. Nothing even approximating a foot.

It would be like us using a sixteenth inch measurement, calling it something else, and having nothing in between that measurement and a yard. It's easy to think of a two foot three and five-eighths inch cut board, when you grew up with it. Easier than thinking of a 70.1657 centimeter board.

[Ulfrinn]

Messaggio originale di Masque:

Messaggio originale di L1qu1dator:

How many inches there are in a yard? Who knows...
How many milimeters in a meter? It's in the name - 1000.
Do you have any smaller unit than an inch btw?

Yes. Anyone in construction, or mechanics, think easily in terms of 32nds, sixteenths, eighths, quarter, and half-inches.

The trouble I have with metric length measurement, and many in construction do, is that there is nothing between centimeter and meter. Nothing even approximating a foot.

It would be like us using a sixteenth inch measurement, calling it something else, and having nothing in between that measurement and a yard. It's easy to think of a two foot three and five-eighths inch cut board, when you grew up with it. Easier than thinking of a 70.1657 centimeter board.

Yeah, and I've been working in mechanical engineering long enough to immediately recognize the decimal forms of most fractional measurements too, down to a 32nd, and tend to think of things in these terms when sketching out parts for machines. So I'll "normalize" measurements that are close to a fractional value to that fractional value like 8.125" or 9.375" etc. It comes pretty naturally.

[Masque]

Wow, so what are the common TV screen measurements out in Metricland?

I'm so used to 40", 55", 65", etc.

I don't think I've ever seen reference to an X cm. screen on any hardware forum or site, ever.