expatriado@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 18:14
collapse
According to James Hoffmann, the ideal temperature to enjoy coffee is between 50°C and 60°C, he may know a thing or two about coffee, and you may think the coffee you drink is hotter that it really is.
RandomStickman@fedia.io
on 09 Sep 2024 17:18
nextcollapse
You can make the temperature dial of an oven have matching degrees of rotation and degrees Celcius.
Turn the dial to point straight down to bake at 180°
Turn it 3/4 of the way to cook a pizza at 270°
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 18:53
collapse
Also it’s a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside, and it requires no prior understanding to use it as such.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 19:22
nextcollapse
The freezing point of water is very important to weather, and requires prior knowledge of the arbitrary number 32.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:27
nextcollapse
Okay so fahrenheit has a well-defined high and low, but an arbitrary freezing point of one certain chemical. All other chemical freezing points are arbitrary.
Celsius has an arbitrary high and low, but a well-defined freezing point of that same chemical. All other freezing points are arbitrary.
If your motivation is to minimize the amount of arbitrary values you have to memorize, fahrenheit is the clear winner.
criticon@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 19:54
nextcollapse
The 0 in Fahrenheit was based on nothing and the 100F was supposed to be human temperature but it is off by some degrees
The water is not an arbitrary temperature, the weather is water dependant, at 0C the water will freeze and you get snow/ice instead of rain
actually@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 18:11
collapse
0°F is when the ocean freezes
100° F was human body temperature, later revised somewhat with better measurements and a decrease of parasites . The average person in those days in London had a slightly higher body temperature than today
0F is not ocean freezing, is the freezing temp of a brine mix that he chose arbitrarily (some think that he chose that temp because it was close to the coldest his town had ever been and he used it to calibrate the scales of his thermometers)
FYI, the ocean freezes at around 28F
actually@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 19:05
collapse
Oceans freezing also depends on currents, and mixing of the water from the surface. 28° will freeze water in a room.
This is why often the ocean is not frozen at much lower temperatures.
I’m not at all cognizant of how 0 was decided
AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 20:55
nextcollapse
The zero C is freezing and 100 C is boiling, so not really arbitrary.
But it’s pretty hard to define a scale that has intuitive, round numbers for everything we might care about.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:45
collapse
You’re correct. In a lab setting, 0C and 100C are not arbitrary.
In the weather forecast, they are.
Which ties into your final point, it’s hard to define a scale that is best for everything, which is exactly what I’ve been saying this whole time.
Fahrenheit is better for some things, Celsius for others.
The only reason people in this thread are saying otherwise is because for some reason they’ve tied up some significant part of their self-worth into their belief that “lmao DAE fahrenheit bad amirite??1?”, and they mistakenly believe that those of us that understand nuance are trying to belittle or disparage them in some way. I assure you, we are not.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:59
collapse
0C and 100C are not arbitrary.
well i mean technically, the only reason they aren’t arbitrary is because the mean something, the numbers arent significant, it’s what they represent, which is the boiling/freezing point of water.
The only reason people in this thread are saying otherwise is because for some reason they’ve tied up some significant part of their self-worth into their belief that “lmao DAE fahrenheit bad amirite??1?”, and they mistakenly believe that those of us that understand nuance are trying to belittle or disparage them in some way. I assure you, we are not.
i’m seeing people put very little thought into the things they’re saying, i just recently posted a comment covering a few of those things in this thread. For some reason europeans seem to just get absolutely brainfucked when presented with the concept of a unit system that isn’t metric, it’s like your literal entire lives are built upon the concept of 0 10 100 scaling, and you can’t consider literally anything outside of it.
Now maybe i’m being a little hyperbolic here, but US peeps pretty well understand that we could just “be using celsius” that’s not really a wacky concept or idea here. Celsius peeps really seem to think that if they had to use fahrenheit, they would probably die from accidental over-consumption of water, somehow. And in their defense, a lot of our shit is kinda fucking weird. But again, it’s really not that bad.
at least, this has been my experience from the various threads i’ve been in on this topic over time.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 21:55
collapse
It’s not like the weather depends on the boiling point of formaldehyde…
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:43
nextcollapse
Is it? Only pure water will actually freeze at 0c. Rain, puddles, lakes, etc aren’t all that pure… And we’re talking about ambient air temps here. The air can be below freezing and it can still rain. And you can get snow/hail above freezing…
Knowing the freezing point is just one factor. Knowing it’s generally around 30F is pretty much always close enough (not that remembering 32 is actually very difficult)
Edit: also water only freezes at 0c if it’s at sea level… I really don’t think 0°=freezing is the huge advantage that celcius stans think it is.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:53
collapse
yeah, and let me know how accurate our weather models and prediction systems are. Can you calculate accurately how much the temperature in a specific part of the atmosphere will drop to a large updraft?
What’s that? This is literally an entire career field of study and development? Oh that’s weird.
Also the only real time this is relevant, is when things that have this weird property called thermal mass get below freezing, it’s snowing in 30f weather? That’s not sticking, the ground is too warm. or the sun will literally just melt it even if it is cold enough. Water? You mean that weird thing called like, a lake or river? Those get below freezing, without actively freezing, lakes won’t even drop that much in terms of temperature, aside from the surface level. The surface may freeze, but even that is pretty variable.
Also yes, it’s the arbitrary number of 32, so is literally every number though. We have 2 numbers to remember, you also have 2 numbers to remember, god forbid you have like, a password, or a passcode, or like, a numbers based lock somewhere. Humans have never been known to be good at memorizing short strings of data.
like idk how to tell you this, but, it’s not that big of a deal?
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 09 Sep 2024 21:01
nextcollapse
If that was true outsiders should be able to use Fahrenheit without much explanation. I’ve never got a clue what the °F values mean, I always have to use a converter. It’s really not as intuitive as people who grew up with it seem to believe.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:48
collapse
If that was true outsiders should be able to use Fahrenheit without much explanation. I’ve never got a clue what the °F values mean, I always have to use a converter. It’s really not as intuitive as people who grew up with it seem to believe.
because it’s all relative, and you need to actually know how the temperatures relate to the things you’re experiencing? I’m going to hazard a guess and say you’re comfortable with using celsius? Oops cognitive bias. You would have to test this on someone who doesn’t understand temperature yet. It just so happens that here in the US, it pretty conveniently lines up with those figures for us.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 10 Sep 2024 05:33
collapse
If your example cannot be proven on any existing person I’d argue it’s hardly relevant to our reality.
°F most definitely isn’t intuitive enough for people who aren’t accustomed to it to use. If it is more intuitive at all, it’s not to any meaningful degree.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:36
collapse
If your example cannot be proven on any existing person I’d argue it’s hardly relevant to our reality.
possibly? Arguably you could still make the case that the existing range of 0-100f is more pleasant, and arguably nicer to use. But you would have to either find someone uniquely adapted to both systems, or you would have to do a lot of independent study on how humans interact with numbers and ranges of numbers. In order to find a specific answer it’s going to be quite hard.
intuition is bullshit anyway, it’s highly predicated on previous experience and an existing knowledge base, so i feel like that’s kind of arguing “well a race car driver drives good, so why don’t normal drivers drive good” kind of territory if you arent careful.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 10 Sep 2024 05:52
collapse
Yeah, which is why most people here in favor of Celcius argue that Fahrenheit isn’t, in fact, more intuitive and therefore more suited to describe the weather. Both are arbitrary, both can be learned and used very easily, the only difference is what you’re used to.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 19:35
collapse
yeah, but i think arguing that celsius is “more intuitive” when the one primary advantage outside of science is that it lines up with water relatively nicely compared to fahrenheit, is like, ok.
32f and 212f and 0c and 100c aren’t really all that substantially different as far as the general use case goes.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 10 Sep 2024 19:59
collapse
arguing that celsius is “more intuitive”
Nobody is arguing that though.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 23:44
collapse
which is why most people here in favor of Celcius argue that Fahrenheit isn’t, in fact, more intuitive and therefore more suited to describe the weather.
hmm.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 11 Sep 2024 04:12
collapse
“Fahrenheit isn’t more intuitive” doesn’t not mean “Celcius is more intuitive”. You’re mistaken if you think that’s what’s being argued here.
Neither one is intuitive. Intuition isn’t a useful metric here anyway. After all we could ask: Which one is more intuitive - kilometers or miles? Kilograms or pounds? Do we have to change how me measure time (base 12) to a base 10 as well, would that be more intuitive?
Answer is no. All those units have to be learned and filled with experience anyway. Nobody can interpret temperature scales intuitively, neither Fahrenheit nor Celsius.
Fahrenheit simply has no advantage over Celcius. And it doesn’t have to. Some people are used to it, so keep using it by all means. Don’t argue that it’s superior and we’re all good.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Sep 2024 19:49
collapse
“Fahrenheit isn’t more intuitive” doesn’t not mean “Celcius is more intuitive”. You’re mistaken if you think that’s what’s being argued here.
i mean, fundamentally that’s what that statement would have to mean, unless you’re referring to a rock being more intuitive or something.
Why would you mention that fahrenheit isn’t as intuitive as celsius, if celsius wasn’t objectively more intuitive? Also why did you use a triple negative?
Neither one is intuitive. Intuition isn’t a useful metric here anyway. After all we could ask: Which one is more intuitive - kilometers or miles? Kilograms or pounds? Do we have to change how me measure time (base 12) to a base 10 as well, would that be more intuitive?
ultimately yeah, neither system is more intuitive than the other. Celsius has a nice use case in science and research, but that’s about it. fahrenheit isn’t really used anywhere outside of weather, and cooking, where it also doesn’t really matter, and no cooking is not “water based chemistry” as someone tried to propose.
also technically time isn’t really in base 12. one year is 12 months, is 31-30 days, is 24 hours, is 60 minutes, is 60 seconds, is then broken into tenths, hundreths, and thousandths of a second from there, etc… It’s not quite one specific system, just a hodgepodge of multiple different structures.
Fahrenheit simply has no advantage over Celcius. And it doesn’t have to. Some people are used to it, so keep using it by all means. Don’t argue that it’s superior and we’re all good.
exactly! I’m not arguing that fahrenheit is better, i’m just trying to get europeans to think it isn’t the single most useless system in the world because they spent 12 seconds thinking about things and got confused when they didn’t spend and more time on it.
I think a lot of people in this thread are just being objectively stupid, and not quite realizing it, and thus saying silly things that don’t make any sense. Europeans seem to do this a lot whenever the US customary unit system comes up in discussion, and i don’t understand why.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 11 Sep 2024 20:56
collapse
i mean, fundamentally that’s what that statement would have to mean, unless you’re referring to a rock being more intuitive or something.
ultimately yeah, neither system is more intuitive than the other.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 12 Sep 2024 03:24
collapse
hey man, i didn’t make the claim. i’m just came here to complain about celsius users not thinking about things. If you can find an example of me saying fahrenheit is more intuitive, i’ll have to eat my words.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 12 Sep 2024 05:33
collapse
Originally you replied to me, replying to someone else claiming fahrenheit was “a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” and required “no prior understanding to use it as such”. This was never about Celsius being intuitive or not, it was about Fahrenheit. If you didn’t disagree with me there, your replies to me were pointless. Since then you seem to be arguing against a straw man.
I never claimed Celcius to be intuitive, in fact I claimed the opposite - neither scale is intuitive. Therefore Fahrenheit and Celcius are equally useful in measuring the weather and the idea of Fahrenheit being especially suitable is incorrect, based on the confirmation bias of those who are already used to it. That’s the only argument I’m making here.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 12 Sep 2024 20:23
collapse
“a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” and required “no prior understanding to use it as such”.
and this is generally the case. I’m sure if you were to sample the opinion of people randomly, this is roughly what you would get back. I may have said that it was an intuitive feature of fahrenheit, and it is, and so is the 0-100 scale of water freezing/boiling in celsius, but that’s irrelevant aside from the fact that it’s intuitive, and that point of contextual relevance you might as well mention that plants are green, and that the sky is blue.
Since then you seem to be arguing against a straw man.
possibly, but i’m mostly complaining about the collective response here, not the particular responses in this thread in particular. Which is also quite long so i don’t even really recall what has been said here to be specifically accurate.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 12 Sep 2024 21:33
collapse
and this is generally the case. I’m sure if you were to sample the opinion of people randomly, this is roughly what you would get back.
Only if you asked people accustomed to Fahrenheit. People who aren’t used to it cannot use it without prior understanding at all. To think otherwise just proves your confirmation bias again.
I may have said that it was an intuitive feature of fahrenheit, and it is, and so is the 0-100 scale of water freezing/boiling in celsius, but that’s irrelevant aside from the fact that it’s intuitive
Then what should “intuitive” even mean if not “intuitive to use”? Because it certainly isn’t that.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 13 Sep 2024 03:47
collapse
Only if you asked people accustomed to Fahrenheit. People who aren’t used to it cannot use it without prior understanding at all. To think otherwise just proves your confirmation bias again.
ok, so you genuinely think, that people who use celsius cannot experience the sensation of “hot” and “cold” without a number referencing the temperature directly in front of them? Specifically that of the celsius system?
I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it’s irrelevant and doesn’t matter. If you were to put someone into a room at either 0 or 100 degrees fahrenheit (without telling them the temperature of the room), from a climate relatively similar to the US, they would either say “it’s really cold” or “it’s really hot” even if they’re not directly from a similar climate, it would still be relatively inline with these expectations.
this is what we mean when we say “really hot” and “really cold” the human body has an innate response to the temperatures that it experiences. Classifying it accurately is hard. But in this case it doesn’t need to be, it’s a heuristic.
Then what should “intuitive” even mean if not “intuitive to use”? Because it certainly isn’t that.
think of a hammer, an intuitive feature of a hammer is pretty obvious, there is only one realistic way to use it. You can’t grab it by the hand and do much with it. The head itself is shaped and specifically designed for a certain type of use case, and the handle is pretty clearly built for holding onto.
going further, an intuitive feature of a rock is the ability to move/throw it. There are certain thing that are so fundamental to the human experience, there isn’t much in the way of conceptualization there.
intuition is simply the ability to naturally reason without external influence. For example, being able to place your foot where it needs to be so you don’t fall down a cliff. And intuitive system would be one that is innately familiar to the user, which obviously nothing is. But systems can have intuitive features or design elements however.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 13 Sep 2024 05:17
collapse
ok, so you genuinely think, that people who use celsius cannot experience the sensation of “hot” and “cold” without a number referencing the temperature directly in front of them? Specifically that of the celsius system?
No and that’s not what I claimed. What I’m saying is that if you tell someone accustomed to Celcius “it’s 42F° outside, oh by the way fahrenheit goes from 0=really cold to 100=really hot”, they have no idea about the actual weather. The points of 0 and 100 Fahrenheit are way to arbitrary to be understood without having experienced them.
“Really cold” and “really hot” are completely subjective. They depend on the climate you’re used to and come down to personal preference even. Your “really cold” might be my “pleasantly chilly”. And even if I knew what 0F° and 100F° were in C° I’d have no idea how that relates to the (probably much more common) values between them. Percentages of subjective temperature tell me nothing. 20F° would basically have to be 20% warmer than “really cold”, right? Intuitively I would have guessed somewhere around 7°C (nice autumn morning), turns out 20F° is still way below the freezing point. The idea of 0F° and 100F° does not, in fact, help me interpret these values “with no prior understanding”.
It’s simply not an intuitive frame of reference - except if you have at one point learned what the numbers mean. And at this point it’s exactly as useful als Celcius.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 14 Sep 2024 01:15
collapse
No and that’s not what I claimed. What I’m saying is that if you tell someone accustomed to Celcius “it’s 42F° outside, oh by the way fahrenheit goes from 0=really cold to 100=really hot”, they have no idea about the actual weather.
obviously, but nobody was saying that, so i’m not sure why it’s relevant.
This is like explaining what a door is to someone, only for them to remove the door and go “well now what’s it supposed to do?”
“Really cold” and “really hot” are completely subjective. They depend on the climate you’re used to and come down to personal preference even.
not strictly? 0f is cold enough to require wearing additional layers if you don’t want to freeze and die after a long enough period of time. 100f, while more livable, is still rather hot. Hot enough that you can’t really do hard labor in that weather. Even people who live in climates that are really hot know this, and there’s a reason they often wear really specific clothing, or end up having darker skin. Although that’s evolutionary advantage at that point.
Unless you took someone living in finland, and someone living in australia. Although deserts aren’t really a fair comparison here either. They can get quite cold as well. They’re obviously going to have a bit of a different reaction, but i doubt it’s going to be significant enough to break the scale. It’s probably going to shift one way or the other a little bit, but that’s to be expected.
Percentages of subjective temperature tell me nothing. 20F° would basically have to be 20% warmer than “really cold”, right? Intuitively I would have guessed somewhere around 7°C (nice autumn morning), turns out 20F° is still way below the freezing point. The idea of 0F° and 100F° does not, in fact, help me interpret these values “with no prior understanding”.
again, you’re applying celsius logic to a fahrenheit problem, and then being surprised when it doesn’t work. You don’t know what 0f is, not because fahrenheit is stupid and bad, but because you don’t use it. So you’re trying to estimate into a system you don’t know, and then you’re complaining about my generalization when it’s your translation that doesn’t work. It’s clearly evident because you even say “20f is way below freezing” which is not at all true here in the fahrenheit lands. 20f is just below freezing here. well below freezing happens when you crack around 10-15f. Way below freezing is quite literally, about 0f.
The idea of 0F° and 100F° does not, in fact, help me interpret these values “with no prior understanding”.
no it doesn’t and thats because you have an anti thetical world view that you’re trying to apply to it. This breaks the application of the heuristic very evidently.
It’s simply not an intuitive frame of reference - except if you have at one point learned what the numbers mean.
sure, but my point is still that the 0f-100f is a broadly applicable heuristic that should roughly hold true. i believe if you convert these numbers into celsius, which is how you would correctly apply this heuristic, you would see something roughly equivalent to -20c and 40c, which to me seems to line up with how celsius peeps seem to experience temperature.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 14 Sep 2024 08:38
collapse
You’re missing the point here entirely.
Is Fahrenheit intuitive? No, proven by the fact that it can’t be used without prior understanding, as shown in my example.
The rest is sealioning.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 15 Sep 2024 03:03
collapse
Is Fahrenheit intuitive? No
no, and neither is any other numbering system, it’s all arbitrary we already determined this.
proven by the fact that it can’t be used without prior understanding, as shown in my example.
as you try and apply celsius logic to the fahrenheit system in order to understand fahrenheit, incorrectly… While still ignoring my prime example here.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 10 Sep 2024 01:40
collapse
Exactly. Fahrenheit is just metric weather.
CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
on 09 Sep 2024 16:41
nextcollapse
By that metric, kelvin would be even better though.
rovingnothing29@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 16:46
nextcollapse
You miss out on screaming that it’s negative anything though.
But mild and comfortable is different for different people who are acclimated to different weather.
We need a defined ‘mild’ temperature. i vote for 70F/21C.
It’s a bit chilly for the warm weathered folks and a bit warm for the cold weathered folks. Seems reasonable but I’m open to suggestions.
Infynis@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 21:26
nextcollapse
As a cold weathered folk, I can confirm that 70 is my upper limit for nice temperature
pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 2024 23:49
nextcollapse
I’d adjust it to 68/20 just so it lines up with whole numbers in both systems. And on second thought, make it 90 per degree Fahrenheit so any whole F or C value can convert to a whole number.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:47
collapse
it needs to be a range, you can’t really just have a single point, something like 50f to 70f would be good. Some people like a little below, some people like a little above, the 60s are generally pretty comfy all around though.
We also need to consider clothing as well. Which i do in this case.
someguy3@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 01:00
collapse
0 for freezing because water falls from the fucking sky.
meeeeetch@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 18:14
collapse
You can absolutely yell about that. And when Fahrenheit flips to negative, you’re ready to express some big feelings about how fucking cold it is.
Dettweiler42@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 16:54
nextcollapse
You mean it’s THREE HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN FUCKING DEGREES OUTSIDE?!
CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 16:56
nextcollapse
And Rankine would be even better than Kelvin in terms of “big number go brrr.” Water boils at 671 R.
Of course, Rankine is the most obnoxious unit I’ve ever had to deal with, but those numbers sure are big!
RandomStickman@fedia.io
on 09 Sep 2024 17:17
nextcollapse
by that metric
Americans cannot understand any metric
snooggums@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 17:58
nextcollapse
Because the minor diameter of the barrel is 5.56 mm and the major diameter is 5.69 mm. If the bullet were smaller than that then the propellant would blow past it. They didn’t make a 'murican millimetre like they did with the imperial system.
BalooWasWahoo@links.hackliberty.org
on 09 Sep 2024 20:23
collapse
I would make a bet that more mass shootings are done with 9mm. Depending on which shootings they consider ‘mass’ I see estimates from 60-80% for handgun usage. I’m sure the cheap .22 is a large number, but 9mm is probably right up there. There is a large bias in reporting the school shootings and shootings involving rifles by the media. They almost ignore the others.
rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 18:29
nextcollapse
28 grams to an ounce
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:35
collapse
In point of fact Americans have gotten impressive results out of far more complicated metrics than metric. It’s not a matter of understanding, it’s a matter of pride. And of not having to buy all new tools.
alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
on 09 Sep 2024 17:53
nextcollapse
OK, but with Rankine, if it’s 101 out, you can go Five Hundred and SIXTY degrees??!
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 19:20
nextcollapse
frezik@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 17:55
nextcollapse
So you’re saying that 0 and 100 aren’t intuitively obvious? I find that really strange when it’s doing a better job keeping to base 10 than the metric system in this particular use case.
yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 2024 18:15
nextcollapse
For Celsius, 0 is freezing cold and 100 is boiling hot - that’s intuitive too.
I have literally never felt 0°F in my life and couldn’t tell you how cold it is, just that it’s very cold. I believe everyone has a rough understanding how 0°C and 100°C feel though.
frezik@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 18:21
collapse
It is intuitive, and that’s fine. Having the same intuition around human comfort zones is also fine. One measurement system can’t really cover everything.
People tend not to want to live in places where it’s routinely under 0F or over 100F. You’ll tolerate it, but you won’t like it. It’s a very natural range of human comfort.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 18:27
nextcollapse
When it comes to a single number on a scale, whatever you grew up with will be more “obvious”. 100F doesn’t give me any more information than 38C does. The whole “base 10” thing only matters if you are actually doing some math to that number.
frezik@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 18:27
nextcollapse
Base 10 makes it much easier to remember.
When was the last time you did math related to temperature?
alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
on 09 Sep 2024 18:38
nextcollapse
Kelvin is used for math pretty regularly. Rankine was too.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 18:58
nextcollapse
For day to day use, it’s just a single number, no one is doing any conversions, etc, with the number. That was my point. There’s nothing to remember. Do you forget what 72F feels like? Do you have to scale it in your head?
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:11
collapse
base 10 is literally just 0-9 so yeah, everyone remembers that.
scaling based on the base 10 figure makes conversions easier, so there’s that.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:06
collapse
100F definitely gives more insight as to the temperature. It’s a 100/100. That’s as hot as a person can really tolerate. If you understand percentages or how to rate things on a scale of 1-10, you understand fahrenheit.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 19:22
collapse
That’s as hot as a person can really tolerate.
There’s large chunks of the world proving that false every day. For the geographically impared, the simple fact that Phoenix has existed for longer than air conditioning, proves that statement false.
And 0F as the low point is equally as useless.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:46
nextcollapse
That’s why I used the qualifier “really” and in another comment I mentioned “in average temperate climates” If you were more familiar with statistics you would understand how means and outliers work.
Just like someone can score a movie an 11/10 or a -1/10, it is possible for the weather to exceed 100F or drop below 0F. Just not typical.
And while I didn’t say it specifically, 0F is similarly the average lowest temperature a person can tolerate/expect before beginning to experience problems.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 20:54
collapse
Hypothermia can be a problem in temperatures as high as 50F. 0F is a meaningless number, outside of purely subjective “it’s cold” uses.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:29
collapse
“Can be”
Yeah if you’re submerged in 50F water you will succumb to hypothermia due to the specific heat of water.
But we’re not discussing swimming pool temperatures, we’re discussing air temperatures. You are not actively in danger of imminent hypothermia at 50F air temp like you are at 0F air temp.
But of course you know that already. You’re not here arguing in good faith, you just want to sling shit at people that have a better understanding of the world than you. If you want to use Celsius for everything, go ahead. No one cares. But the intelligent world will keep using both.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 10 Sep 2024 04:36
collapse
But the intelligent world will keep using both.
Lol
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:14
collapse
fun fact about phoenix, going outside on a day that’s about 100f, is not fucking pleasant they literally have air misters to help provide cooling, which barely does anything.
People are just fucking insane and will live in places like alaska where the ground is literally frozen all year round. Phoneix AZ is not “habitable”, it’s bearable. Also a lot of these places, especially in hotter dryer regions, will have covered sidewalks to provide shade, (at least historically) people would and still do wear large hats to block a lot of the sun. Even then a lot of people wouldn’t spend a whole bunch of time outside in that heat.
also, have you seen death valley? It kills people, every fucking year.
the numbers may be, but if you asked me to tell you what they feel like i would have to convert them to celsius first. where i live temperatures are generally between -30 and +30, and i could tell you in an instant what I would wear for a given temperature in that range. 50F though? no clue. since it’s right between 0 and 100 i guess it would be just right, temperature wise, so t-shirt and long pants?
frezik@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 18:33
nextcollapse
Can you remember that at temperatures near 0F and 100F, you need to take special precautions when going outside? The rest is a matter of getting used to what the numbers mean, but those are very intuitive danger points.
-18 is such an arbitrary place for “special precautions”. at 0, I know to start driving more carefully since the roads ice up. at -15, i know to wear long johns. at +15, i know to start using a thinner jacket. at -30, i know to use a thick hat and wax on my cheeks to prevent the blood vessels from rupturing. at +30, I know to use a large hat and sun cream on my cheeks to prevent them from burning.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:10
collapse
18 is such an arbitrary place for “special precautions”
cool little trick, you see how -18 is like, pretty close to -20, yeah. You can just round them. It really doesn’t matter
no, Celsius starts at +273.15 K, because that’s where an element we are all dependent on to live and in contact with every day undergoes an important phase transition.
What happens at 0°F?
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 23:34
collapse
What happens at 0°F?
why does it matter? Water freezes at 32 degrees f. What happens at 32 degrees C? What happens at 212 degrees C?
Also no, it doesn’t start at +273.15 K, that’s not how number ranges work. If you have a list of numbers between -10 and 10. And you were to sort them, least to most, -10 would be at the bottom, obviously.
you realize that temperature is a measure of the energy within a substance/material right? It’s intrinsically tried to the physics and atomic structure underlying the material substance. That always starts at the lowest temperature point, the point being where it is is just a reference
it starts at +273.15K because that is the lower of the two reference points used in its creation. the Kelvin scale was created later and builds on the Celsius scale. of course lower temps are sorted first, that’s not what matters. it’s why we call these scales “degrees”, after all.
why it matters is because the scale i use every day constantly gets “verified” by passing the zero marker and showing that things outside freeze. that makes it a good reference point that builds its own intuition.
that’s what this is all about, after all: how useful a scale is for everyday use. a scale that is relevant to my needs and that has important events happen on easy-to-remember points of the scale requires very little teaching.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Sep 2024 19:39
collapse
why it matters is because the scale i use every day constantly gets “verified” by passing the zero marker and showing that things outside freeze. that makes it a good reference point that builds its own intuition.
any number is equally as good for an arbitrary reference point. And it can arguably be even more confusing, let’s take a page out of CS acronyms and short hands. GB and GiB (often shortened improperly) GB being 1000, GiB being 1024. Now i feel like i don’t have to explain why this is a bad thing.
1024 is an odd unit, but it’s sequential powers of 2, so it’s trivial to think about. 1000 is a nice unit, but it doesn’t map nicely into storage, or binary strings.
like to me the difference between 0-100 and 32-212 is basically nothing. Sure it’s a weird number, but they’re both numbers so. Really the only proper utility it has is the SI unit meta, and the fact that it maps into kelvin. Outside of that i don’t see why 0 or 32 as the freezing point are any different. It might be more visually pleasing, but like, fahrenheit also takes that one as well, given that the 0f-100f thing is accurate. I feel like they’re just equivalent.
i just don’t see why it matters, like at all. People do much more complicated things on a daily basis. People remember random strings of numbers as passcodes, people remember random strings of letters as for passwords.
idk i feel like it’s just weird to sit here on the internet and complain about how you need water to freeze at 0 degrees, and how it must boil at 100 degrees. When neither of those are like, relevant? For most day to day activities at least. Maybe in the winter, but again, 32.
would it be nicer if fahrenheit suddenly had water freeze at 0f tomorrow, as well as boil at 200f? Probably, but like, i wouldn’t care. It just seems like such an odd thing to care about to me.
this all started because of the claim that Fahrenheit is better for “human” temperatures. when saying “that’s just because you’re used to it” apparently wasn’t valid, it spiralled on into this massive discussion where i’ve tried to show with what i feel is quite a lot of anecdata that indeed, you only feel that Fahrenheit is better for human temperatures because you’re used to it. meanwhile, the rest of the world can’t understand these numbers at all because they are not used to them, and use Celsius for human temperatures every day.
of course it doesn’t matter. at least, not in a vacuum. but when interacting with the rest of the world, it does.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 12 Sep 2024 03:38
collapse
this all started because of the claim that Fahrenheit is better for “human” temperatures.
so technically, it was originally a shitpost about how fahrenheit temperatures can go above 100, which is clearly better.
beyond that, a lot of people just proposed that fahrenheit is nice because “the 0-100 metric is kind of nice and lines up conveniently” which is perfectly accurate, as evidenced by people existing and using it, there’s not exactly a psyop for making people think fahrenheit is better lol.
literally the primary distinction here, is that celsius users think celsius is better because “water freezes at 0, and boils at 100” and fahrenheit users have merely proposed that “fahrenheit lines up fairly nicely with the human experience such that 0f is cold and 100f is hot”
and then celsius users have pretty much gone ape shit over these statements.
like to be clear, both of these arguments are literally the same.
meanwhile, the rest of the world can’t understand these numbers at all because they are not used to them, and use Celsius for human temperatures every day.
this is like being an english only speaker, and then discovering that the french language genders tables. And then becoming entirely irate over the fact that this language that you don’t know, and can’t speak genders tables.
You see my problem here right? Like it’s funny as a shitpost, but celsius users are grabbing a ratchet, realizing they don’t know how to use them, accidentally clobbering themselves over the head with it, and then being really confused and mad when people think that this is a pretty silly thing to do.
like it’s great that you guys don’t know fahrenheit because the rest of the world uses celsius. That’s great for you, who asked though? You can do the same things with race and gender as well. “white people are more advanced, surely we must be smarter right?”
like with all due respect, to you and everybody else who uses celsius, this is stupid. I don’t know if you guys think that fahrenheit people don’t know that celsius has a better boiling point of water, we know all of this shit. And we can even convert back into celsius, more often than not, because we have to interact with you guys, more frequently. Because statistically, there are more of you. Like the sheer amount of people in this thread that were just pretentious for no reason, is mindbogglingly astounding.
Like unironically, having seen this thread twice, once on reddit. I legitimately hold less of an opinion of Europeans now. Like from my perspective, these people are just whining and complaining about the most asinine of things, “oh no 96f, that’s not a nice number” yeah, it’s a conversion bro. What did you expect? And then when i mention that these are unreasonable opinions, as they are. Obviously. (so would any countering opinions, naturally) they get really confused or just say really stupid things? I’ve had people unironically tell me that there are different climates, like america doesn’t have any of those. I’ve had someone compare 0f to 100f, in the same exact situation. Literally just going outside naked. Why? Who goes outside naked when it’s cold?
You could tell me that this is a once yearly european psyop to make americans think that europeans are stupid, and i would believe you.
like i’m genuinely so confused, because i can’t tell if this is just some incredibly elaborate troll, or if celsius users genuinely can’t think outside of a box.
You see my problem here right? Like it’s funny as a shitpost, but celsius users are grabbing a ratchet, realizing they don’t know how to use them, accidentally clobbering themselves over the head with it, and then being really confused and mad when people think that this is a pretty silly thing to do.
…yeah.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:08
collapse
yeah no shit, but think of it this way, if you were put into a place that was 100f, you would go “damn this bitch hot out here” and if you were put into a place that was 0f you would go “damn this joint cold as fuck fr”
What if it was 99f? Or 1f? Would your scientific “damn this bitch hot out here” change to something else?
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:20
collapse
no? Because it’s not entirely hinged around the temperature being one specific number???
Do you think the human body is a perfectly accurate thermometer?
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 18:42
nextcollapse
No, they’re not. I couldn’t tell what those numbers mean even if you asked, but I can tell what 0°C outside feels, and what 100°C sauna feels. I can also tell that 21°C is a nice ambient temperature for chilling, and 15-20°C is ideal for most outdoor sports.
Yeah sure those are not necessarily nice round numbers, but I’ve used the scale all my life so it’s intuitive to me, same as the Fahrentrash is intuitive to you
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:02
collapse
No, that’s not how this works.
You understand the concept of a scale. If I asked you to rate something on a scale of 1-10, you know what i mean. It has nothing to do with intuitiveness. If I asked you to rate something on a scale of 7-23, you’d know what I mean, even though the numbers are different than what you’re used to.
So if I said it was 100F outside, you’d know that’s very uncomfortably hot, as hot as a normal person can really tolerate, because you’d recognize it as the high end of the scale.
Everyone can understand fahrenheit, some people just try really hard not to.
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 19:09
nextcollapse
You really don’t understand what reference points are. The scale is useless without reference points, and I’m not accustomed to them while I have very clear ones for Celsius.
Sure I can understand that 100F feels very hot, but if I was outside in that temperature I couldn’t tell you an estimate in Fahrenheit how hot it feels
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:23
nextcollapse
The reference points are 0 and 100! You don’t have to get accustomed to them, they are the same reference points used by the entire base-10 numerical system. It is a percentage.
And yes, you could step out into 100F degree heat and accurately estimate the temperature. Is it the hottest day of summer? Are you beginning to experience symptoms of heat fatigue? Are you saying to yourself “This is one of the hottest days I have ever experienced”, all the same stuff you’d think if you stepped outside into 37.8C weather. Then it’s probably close to the high end of the scale, i.e. 100F.
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 19:44
collapse
Okay so you’re making lot of weird assumptions here. I don’t know how hot weather 37°C feels, other than that for me 30+ is absolute hell. I’ve never experienced heatwave that bad for what I remember. Hottest summer days here are just about 30°C, and it’s miserable.
Reference point means that I’m able to easily understand what that temperature is.
I can easily understand 100°C though, sauna is getting too hot and I should open window and chill down with feeding the fire.
For 0-30 I can easily understand how I should dress outside, and 0°C is easy to understand because just above it and I know it’s going to be wet and slippery if there was negatives before it, and below 0 is slippery if there was positives earlier.
What is intuitive to you is totally a subjective experience based on your earlier experiences and what you’re used to use to measure temperatures.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 20:01
collapse
Lmao your sauna is not clearing 100C, that’s well past the point at which saunas can become hazardous to your health. If you genuinely run your sauna that hot then start looking into competitions because you’re gonna blow all those professionals out of the water.
Also I’m not making any assumptions here. That’s just you trying to grasp at straws to save your failing argument. You don’t know what 37C feels like? Weird, I know what 100F feels like. I guess fahrenheit is just more intuitive than Celsius (by your logic, anyway).
Also, all you’ve done is list a bunch of understandings about Celsius that depend entirely on experience and prior knowledge. “Above 0 is like this, below is like that, I know how to dress for 0-30”
This is all stuff you had to be taught/learn, the exact opposite of intuitive.
But I can say to someone unfamiliar with either system “Fahrenheit is a 0-100 scale of hot how it is outside” and they know almost everything they need to know about fahrenheit.
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:27
collapse
Lmao your sauna is not clearing 100C, that’s well past the point at which saunas can become hazardous to your health. If you genuinely run your sauna that hot then start looking into competitions because you’re gonna blow all those professionals out of the water.
Dry sauna at 100°C is not terribly hot feeling, but then again I don’t like dry sauna. In those competitions the sauna was NOT dry, but water thrown onto the rocks every 30sec. That’s actual hell to be in
Also, all you’ve done is list a bunch of understandings about Celsius that depend entirely on experience and prior knowledge.
Exactly. Because that is required to understand what the numbers mean. Congratulations for understanding what I said while completely missing the point
But I can say to someone unfamiliar with either system “Fahrenheit is a 0-100 scale of hot how it is outside” and they know almost everything they need to know about fahrenheit.
Fahrenheit is none of that. It requires prior knowledge and understanding where the scale lies. By your logic, 50°F should be perfectly nice ambient temperature, but in reality it’s plenty cold enough for hypothermia
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:41
collapse
What makes you think humans, an endothermic species, desires exactly 50% thermal energy?
We enjoy the 70F region because we are warm blooded mammals.
“In International Sauna Championships the sauna was heated to 110°C”
Yeah. And 2 people collapsed, 1 died from it.
www.bbc.com/news/magazine-10912578
A 5-time champion who had excellent tolerance.
“Exactly. Because that is required to understand what the numbers mean (in celsius)”
Exactly, because fahrenheit doesn’t require such a random set of arbitrary associations. Congratulations for understanding what I said while trying so hard to miss the point.
Look, you can argue all you want. The fact is that both systems have their applications. I don’t believe you genuinely disagree with this statement. I think you’re just here because you want to sling shit at people that are different than you. Nothing you say will make Celsius better at determining ambient temperature, nothing you say will make fahrenheit better for use in a lab. Get over it.
IAmNotACat@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 23:00
collapse
I dunno, man. You’ve been driving home this idea that Fahrenheit is a scale and therefore great for intuiting ambient temperature, you can’t just turn around and be all ‘Well OBVIOUSLY 50% isn’t the neutral point.’
In any scale where 0 is dangerously low and 10 is dangerously high, 5 would be a happy medium.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 23:02
collapse
That’s simply not how scales work. You’ll figure it out someday.
IAmNotACat@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 23:10
collapse
It’s how useful scales work.
But well done on the Herculean effort you’ve put forth in demonstrating your general ignorance.
frezik@midwest.social
on 09 Sep 2024 19:40
collapse
0 and 100 aren’t just “very cold” and “very hot”. They are potentially dangerously so, and you need to take extra precautions at temperatures beyond those limits. You don’t necessarily have to understand it beyond that.
It is pretty funny how your supposed completely intuitive human feeling system needs to have all these disclaimers added to it whenever you try to explain it. Perhaps it is only intuitive because you are used to it after all?
frezik@midwest.social
on 10 Sep 2024 13:18
collapse
Three sentences is a lot of disclaimers to you? Really?
If you’d say it is 100F outside, I wouldn’t know what you mean because I have no concept of Fahrenheit. Is 100F actually hot? What is that in Celsius? Do you mean hot as in “better to wear light clothes” or “Do not set a foot outside or you will melt”?
What does it mean “as hot as a normal person can really tolerate”? What about a abnormal person?
It gives nothing of information. Just a rough indication of what it might be. Which isn’t useful at all.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:33
collapse
Do you understand the base-10 numerical system? Do you understand percentages? Congratulations, you understand fahrenheit. You can no longer honestly say, on the internet or otherwise, that fahrenheit is meaningless to you. You are now a fahrenheit understander, whether you like it or not.
Also, your second statement answers your first question. When I say “as hot as a normal person can tolerate” i do not mean “wear light clothes”, I mean “as hot as a normal person can tolerate”. Thats why i said “as hot as a normal person can tolerate”. Happy to clear that up you for you.
Abnormalities/outliers are not something on which we should base standards of measurements.
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:59
collapse
You keep saying this but it still doesn’t make any sense. 50% heat would be average middle of the pack nice? And “as hot as normal person can tolerate” is full of shit because neither you or I have no concept of what “normal person can tolerate”, as the normal depends on your geography. And this is quite a good reason why claiming “Fahrenheit is how human feels” is just idiotic as it relies both on a specific climate and having learned that scale growing up.
I swear you Americans can get so fucking stupid on this topic, it’s like claiming that Finnish is the most intuitive language because it’s the language of how love (average love, excluding outliers obviously) feels
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:23
collapse
Lmao and there it is.
“You americans”
It was never about temperature. You just love any excuse to shit on people that are different.
God forbid a country teach the value of both systems. Your tiny mind evidently cannot comprehend the very idea of 2+ methods of measurement.
And yes, no matter how much you screech to the contrary, there is a maximum safe temperature a human can exist in, and it’s roughly 100F. Yes that varies based on an individuals tolerances, which is why I’ve specified on many occasions that it’s representative of the average climate in a temperate region. If you were capable of reading, you’d know that.
They aren’t. And fahrenheit is not a 0-100 scale. It is just the scale you picked out of it in order to make some kind of sense out of the non-intuitive system which it is.
alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
on 09 Sep 2024 18:06
nextcollapse
100F was defined as the human body temperature (The guy they used had a cold or something so it’s off by a degree and a half.)
That’s useful for perception of heat. When the dry bulb gets above 100F, wind only cools you down by sweat evaporation, and when the wet bulb gets above 100F, even that can’t cool you down, and you will die if you don’t get to a cooler or drier environment.
what Fahrenheit used for his endpoints was 1) the melting point of a brine mixture that he didn’t write down the ratio of, and 2) his wife’s armpit.
those “bulb” things is something i only ever hear of from americans. it’s never used here.
and I fail to see how two numbers are somehow differently intuitive. they are just numbers.
also, 36.5 is too low. it’s pretty much 37.0 now, because average body temp has interestingly enough shifted since he took those measurements.
alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
on 09 Sep 2024 19:13
nextcollapse
Dry bulb is the temperature independent of humidity. Wet bulb is has a wet cloth on the thermometer bulb. This simulates how much sweat cools you in the current humidity and wind.
Measuring humidity instead and cross-referencing to get heat index is more common these days, but IMO it’s worse. 120 in the desert vs 120 heat index due to humidity is the difference between someone using a hair dryer on your face and getting cooked in a steam room, and it doesn’t consider wind and cloud cover.
Dry bulb is a normal temperature reading with say a thermometer. Wet bulb is that same thermometer but it is wrapped in a wet cloth to simulate evaporation of sweat.
The purpose of wet bulb temperature measurement is to fix the dangerous temperature threshold at body temperature instead of having to adjust for humidity. So if the wet bulb temperature crosses 35C/95F you know that it is dangerous to even be outside because your sweat can’t even evaporate enough to prevent you from overheating just standing in the shade.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 18:56
nextcollapse
Um. No.
If I said a movie was a 7/10, you would understand what that means because it’s a scale. You don’t have to “grow up” using a 0-10 scale to understand it.
Like if I asked you to rate something on a scale of 4-17, you’d understand what I mean. The numbers are different but the concept of a scale remains the same.
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
on 09 Sep 2024 19:29
nextcollapse
Really not. Basically, you just need to peg feelings to a number, just like you are doing.
Celsius:
below -20 = deadly even with good gear, you can’t spend long here
-15 = very dangerous / deadly
-10 = starting to get dangerous
-5 = starting to get uncomfortable
0 = very cold
5 = cold
10 = a little cold
15 = cool
20 = nice
25 = warm
30 = hot
35 = starting to get uncomfortable
40 = starting to get dangerous
45 = very dangerous / deadly
50+ = deadly even with good gear, you can’t spend long here
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:41
collapse
I don’t think you understand what I said.
Also, that’s a lot of explaining, and lots of feelings associated with arbitrary numbers. Fahrenheit doesn’t need anywhere near that level of explanation. It doesn’t necessitate the pegging of feelings to random numbers.
The sentence “Fahrenheit is a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” is all anyone needs to immediately understand and be able to use fahrenheit. I didn’t need to type out a long list of what each temperature value means to me. There is no need for a mneumonic such as “10 is cold, 20s not, 30s warm, and 40s hot”
If you’re doing math in a lab, absolutely use Celsius. I’m not saying it doesn’t have a place. It’s just not the be-all end-all most perfectest temperature measurement system ever.
I think you are projecting your feeling onto others; I don’t have “a mneumonic” in my head. That was for your benefit, since you are not immersed in that scale.
When I see the weather report and it says tomorrow it is going to be 25 degrees with light wind, I know that it will be a pleasant day. The same way I know what the reporter is saying, I have been immersed in the English language since birth, it requires no though to understand the words they are saying.
It requires no thought to understand that 25 degrees and light wind is a nice day. It just is.
I don’t have that intuitive sense for the F scale, I always have to convert it to a sensible number. I know 100 is around 37, which is really hot.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:53
collapse
But it requires you to be familiar with an arbitrary -20 - 40 scale. Which makes way less sense than a 0-100 scale.
I don’t need to use the mnemonic either, I grew up in the U.S. so I understand both systems perfectly well. But the mnemonic exists because Celsius uses an inherently less sensible scale. You only understand it internally because you grew up with it.
A person who grew up with neither system would find fahrenheit easier to understand from an unbiased position because it’s more logical.
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
on 09 Sep 2024 20:17
nextcollapse
deg C is no more arbitrary than deg F; any more than French is more arbitrary than English.
It is a strange argument to say “You only understand it internally because you grew up with it.”; well yes, but that is exactly the same with the deg F scale.
A person who grew up with neither system would find fahrenheit easier to understand from an unbiased position because it’s more logical.
In your opinion.
In my opinion it is far more logical to base you temperature scale on repeatable physical measurements, than say what a person feels.
0 C = water freezes
0 F =
Several accounts of how he originally defined his scale exist, but the original paper suggests the lower defining point, 0 °F, was established as the freezing temperature of a solution of brine made from a mixture of water, ice, and ammonium chloride (a salt)
100 C = water boils
100 F = best estimate for average human body temperature.
The F scale is not built on logic.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 23:00
collapse
Okay yeah you’re totally right Celsius is the most perfectest and wonderful system of temperature measurement and it can do everything and it’s magical and perfect for every single application ever.
Sure, bud.
Also “repeatable physical measurements”
I think I found your problem. You seem to think that a fahrenheit thermometer will display a different temperature each time something is measured, even if the temperature has not changed. Allow me to clarify for you: if you measure something at a constant temperature more than once with a fahrenheit thermometer, the thermometer will display the same value each time, just like Celsius. I can see how that misconception could’ve led to your confusion, I’m glad I could help you to understand better. Let me know if you need anything else explained to you.
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
on 09 Sep 2024 23:18
nextcollapse
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 23:38
collapse
Of course the last bastion of the failed debate, a poor attempt to dismiss the oppositions’ arguments as logical fallacies. The only problem is you clearly have no idea what either of those logical fallacies are. Didn’t even mention reductio ad absurdum.
It’s ridiculous that you’re actually here arguing that there’s absolutely no place in modern science for the fahrenheit system of measurement. What a backwards, preposterous stance to take. Your small-mindedness will not serve you.
You literally were refuting points that I didn’t make, that is a straw man. You stopped debating in good faith; therefore the debate is over.
It’s ridiculous that you’re actually here arguing that there’s absolutely no place in modern science for the fahrenheit system of measurement.
Again; I didn’t say that, that is you.
Now that the debate is over we may commence the shit slinging.
You sir, are an uneducated rat fondler; I hope you enjoy your mothers basement.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 00:01
collapse
My dude, my entire claim is “both systems of measurement have their applications”
And you objected to that. You are here right now arguing the contrary. You chose to voice an opposing opinion.
Do you even know what your point is? Are you seriously so unfulfilled that you’re here just arguing for the sake of arguing?
Look, I’ve made my point, I’ve provided arguments to support it. I’m not gonna keep arguing with some edgelord. Good luck with whatever.
It is pretty funny how you keep claiming “fahrenheit is the best system for human temperature” countless times. Celsius users then question that, though without claiming celsius is better, it is just something we are used to.
And then you get all pissy and strawman celsius users as saying the exact thing you have been claiming about fahrenheit this entire thread.
But it requires you to be familiar with an arbitrary -20 - 40 scale. Which makes way less sense than a 0-100 scale.
Your 0-100 scale is just as arbitrary, in fact even more, since it doesn’t even cover the daily temperatures huge parts of the global population lives in.
if I knew that you are a european and you told me a movie was 5/10, i would assume it was average. if i knew you were American, i would assume it was dogshit.
Americans have a weird relationship with numbers.
also, as mentioned in another post: if 0 is too cold and 100 is too hot, surely 50 would be a pleasant temperature?
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:52
nextcollapse
“Americans” ah, I see. You don’t actually care about effective systems of measurement, you just want to shit on people that are different from you.
Also, as answered in another post:
Why would you assume that humans, an endothermic species, prefers exactly 50% thermal energy? Of course we sit around the 70F region, we’re warm-blooded mammals. We don’t want to be half cold, we want to be mostly warm.
No matter how much you complain or argue, it’s never going to be true that Celsius is the one-and-only most perfect system of temperature measurement. The fact is that both systems have their applications, as any intelligent member of the scientific community would tell you.
considering america is the only place that uses it, i can’t really find any other factor to use.
the point of a temperature scale is to quantify temperature as to ease its communication. if one player is using a different scale that’s just complicating things.
also, if its an “intuitive” scale, surely it should take human bias into account?
IAmNotACat@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 23:04
collapse
Dear god, is Fahrenheit the reason behind meaningless movie ratings? Another reason to hate it…
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:07
collapse
fahrenheit doesn’t exist if you use celsius i guess??
It doesn’t, because celsius users doesn’t think about fahrenheit at all.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:23
collapse
yeah, and it seems to me like they’re the wrong ones here, because i can think about things in celsius perfectly fine without my worldview imploding, in fact i can pretty accurately estimate temperature conversions even.
Like it’s great that you guys don’t have to use it, but please think about it a little bit harder before saying something really goofy that can be explained easily. Or just like, shitpost.
ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net
on 09 Sep 2024 17:47
nextcollapse
Use Kelvin then, 314°K is a way bigger number
pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
on 09 Sep 2024 18:14
collapse
No °, just K
314 K
MelodiousFunk@startrek.website
on 09 Sep 2024 19:06
collapse
alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
on 09 Sep 2024 18:04
nextcollapse
But really it is much better for human temperatures.
It’s just intuitive, 0F is 0% hot, and 100F is 100% hot.
When the dry bulb gets above 100F, wind only cools you down by sweat evaporation, and when the wet bulb gets above 100F, even that can’t cool you down, and you will die if you don’t get to a cooler or drier environment.
pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
on 09 Sep 2024 18:14
nextcollapse
I love it when it’s -10% hot in winter nights or 110% hot around the equator. Makes perfect sense.
alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
on 09 Sep 2024 18:19
nextcollapse
Yes, it does a better job of impressing that is all of the hot (or cold), and then 10% more than the difference between 38 and 43
flora_explora@beehaw.org
on 09 Sep 2024 18:47
nextcollapse
Any of the systems is better if you have an intuitive understanding of it. I don’t know what 107 F would feel like, just as you don’t know what 42°C feels like. But it’s not a thing where one is inherently better than the other…
i assure you, we who grew up with celsius absolutely know the dire difference between 38 and 43. 38 is death, 43 is the crimson realms where even souls wither.
all this “which one is better for x” is nonsense, you develop a feel for whichever you grew up with. it’s just that the math is less stupid with metric. that’s all.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 12 Sep 2024 00:05
collapse
Yes, it does, actually, if you understand how thermal energy works.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 18:14
nextcollapse
“Intuitive” is a meaningless metric for a single scaled number. Whichever system you are used to will be the more “intuitive”.
Also, climate can play into which system feels more useful. Where I live, 100F occurs only rarely (and since air conditioning is almost ubiquitous, not something I’d bother looking out for), while 0C is an outdoor temperature that I do need to be aware of for half the year.
I disagree that either would be just as intuitive. Fahrenheit being 0=cold and 100=hot is intuitive because there are a lot of things we do in the world that exist on a scale of 0 - 100. Percentages, just off the bat. Also, fahrenheit has a higher degree of fidelity in the temperature range that we use.
Celsius’s general temperature scale is like -10 - 40 which is absolutely not intuitive because it doesn’t look like any other scale we use as humans. I agree that we get used to Celsius fast and it’s a fine it’s not like it’s super confusing (and Celsius is so much more useful scientifically).
Wrufieotnak@feddit.org
on 09 Sep 2024 18:37
nextcollapse
Which system did you grow up with?
Because I grew up from the start with Celsius und it is 100% intuitive to me. Everytime you americans use your funny temperature numbers I have to stop and use a tool for transforming it or I simply ignore it and go “low means cold and high means hot, how high? Ain’t nobody got time for dat!”
So I disagree with your notion that Fahrenheit is intuitive. The system you grew up with and have multiple experiences as reference points for, is the system you feel is intuitive is also my opinion.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:04
nextcollapse
What you grew up with =/= what is intuitive.
That is not what intuitive means.
You’re talking about what’s “familiar”.
Familiarity is subjective.
Intuitiveness is objective.
Wrufieotnak@feddit.org
on 09 Sep 2024 19:21
collapse
If we want to go that road, intuition is according to Wikipedia:
Intuition is the ability to acquire knowledge, without recourse to conscious reasoning or needing an explanation.[2][3] Different fields use the word “intuition” in very different ways, including but not limited to: direct access to unconscious knowledge; unconscious cognition; gut feelings; inner sensing; inner insight to unconscious pattern-recognition; and the ability to understand something instinctively, without any need for conscious reasoning.[4][5] Intuitive knowledge tends to be approximate.[6]
Since every temperature system needs an explanation, namely the reference points, no system is or even can be intuitive per this definition.
we_avoid_temptation@lemmy.zip
on 09 Sep 2024 19:04
nextcollapse
That’s not either scale being intuitive or unintuitive, that’s your familiarity with one over the other.
I got curious so I did some research on the definitions and why everything is this way. It looks like they originally picked the coldest thing they had (brine, possibly inspired by the coldest weather), the freezing point of water, human body temperature, and the boiling point of water. It was supposed to be brine at 0, water freezing at 30, the human body at 90, and water boiling at 240. Fahrenheit then recalibrated his scale slightly to make his math (and thermometer design and production) easier, and also because he noticed water actually boiled at 212 by his newly modified scale.
Looking at it like that work the context of what they had at the time and what they were trying to do, it makes a lot of sense.
Never said either one can’t be intuitive, just that the scale of farenheit has a precedence outside of it being an arbitrary temperature measurement by being a scale that goes from about 0 - 100.
If you had never used either scale and some one asked: “which is more intuitive, a temperature scale where -10 is really cold and 40 is really hot or one where 0 is really cold and 100 is really hot?” I know which one I would pick because I’ve done things before like calculate percentages and work in a base 10 system so it makes sense for the scale to be between two orders of magnitude.
Wrufieotnak@feddit.org
on 09 Sep 2024 19:53
collapse
But that is what we others are saying: there is no “more intuitive” system, just one you know better and can quicker evaluate how it would feel! So you agree with us.
Everything you said can be said about Celsius scale as well.
There is also a precedence for Celsius more than just an arbitrary number between 0 & 100.
A scale for liquid water, you know, the stuff that is the reason why we call our little spaceship "the blue marble"and why we even have this discussion, because it is the basis of all life on earth, is also not a bad choice for a number between 0-100.
And you made me curious: in what context did you have to calculate percentages of temperature that were not in Kelvin? Because as soon as percentages and temperatures are close to each other in one sentence the only example I can think of are things like reaction kinetic calculations and those are neither in Celsius nor in Fahrenheit.
You should examine your definition of intuitive. Yes, technically nothing is intuitive it’s just based on what you know because intuition is also based on what you’re used to.
By your logic, if you compare a machine that powers on by pressing a big glowing red button labeled “ON” and one that turns on by you performing the haka in front of a camera while reciting a Shakespeare sonnet backwards you might say that there is no “more intuitive” way to turn on a machine, just one you know better and can perform quicker!
You aren’t reading what you’re replying to because I said in a previous post that it’s easy to get used to Celsius and fahrenheit and there’s no difference to either and I also already said that Celsius is better for science because it’s based on water.
Everything you said can be said about Celsius scale as well.
At this point you’re just lying or further proving that you didn’t even read the post you tried to respond patronizingly to. I said that the Fahrenheit scale is intuitive because it’s a 0-100 scale which is similar to other scales we use all the time and works well for our base 10 counting system being a scale essentially between two powers of 10. Neither of that can be said for Celsius and that’s so obvious I think you just didn’t read it before replying.
And hell, on top of all this, I think we should all switch to using Celsius! Because as I mentioned it’s easy to grasp both scales and using Celsius makes understanding a lot of science easier which I think is the only real argument in this arbitrary choice between the two! But I’m out here explaining the use of Fahrenheit because people here can’t grasp my explanation for why people might use it and are acting like they’ve got the defeater to a post they didn’t even read!
But fahrenheit is not a 0-100 scale. You have just arbitrarily picked out 0-100 because that makes your brain more easily understand the non-intuitive system which is fahrenheit.
SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 18:42
nextcollapse
It has only been 100°F once in the last century. Nobody has any point of reference to make this intuitive. 30°C/85°F is defined as hot around here. 40°C/100°F is defined as national emergency.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:49
nextcollapse
“It has only been 100F once in the last century”
Lmao what?? Go ahead and find me a source for that.
I guarantee you it reaches 100F regularly during summer in many temperate climates, that’s not even including warmer regions.
Do you think your little small town is the only place in the universe?
SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 20:21
collapse
it reaches 100F regularly during summer in many temperate climates,
Not when it’s near the sea, like most of western Europe. It’s the same shit as “why don’t you have airco?” Because it was never that hot.
Lizardking27@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:54
collapse
Tell that to the gulf coast, or Mexico, or central America, or Africa, or Australia.
Your experiences are not universal. Just because you’ve never seen 100F doesn’t mean no one else has. That’s absurd.
TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 09 Sep 2024 21:45
collapse
The heat index gets over 100°F in much of the southern US every summer
“cold” and “hot” are completely non-descriptive and useless parameters for your supposed “intuitive” system.
UlyssesT@hexbear.net
on 09 Sep 2024 18:28
nextcollapse
Being 41% of the way to boiling water sounds pretty hot to me, too.
1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 2024 18:52
nextcollapse
How is 0F 100% cold though, most places will never get that cold, so it surely makes more sense to have 0F at freezing point of water and 100F at 38C?
MadBob@feddit.nl
on 09 Sep 2024 19:03
nextcollapse
Not to mention negative numbers.
OpenStars@discuss.online
on 09 Sep 2024 20:08
collapse
Freezing point of pure water - but saltwater/brine freezes as a different temperature.
1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
on 10 Sep 2024 04:58
collapse
pure water at mean atmosphere pressure at sea level if we’re getting technical, but frankly human body temperature varies from 35.5C (95.9F) to 37.5C (99.5F) anyway, and that’s before considering when people are ill, so if we go down that route it falls apart quickly enough that the definition of 100 given above is clearly just as arbitrary
OpenStars@discuss.online
on 10 Sep 2024 12:22
collapse
I’m okay with “mean atmosphere pressure” bc that’s what is most likely to occur, whereas pure water seems far less likely to be found in a coastal village. The oddness of the measuring abilities of the devices made at the time is a more damning argument, but less for them back then and more for us now. Still, roughly negative ten to 40 for Celsius vs. roughly zero to one hundred for Fahrenheit, the latter does seem to use more “natural” numbers, even if nothing else about non-metric systems makes any sense.
Honytawk@lemmy.zip
on 09 Sep 2024 19:11
nextcollapse
People do live outside of North America. I know that must be news to you, but it is the truth.
Nakoichi@hexbear.net
on 10 Sep 2024 09:07
nextcollapse
When I was out in SD recently the temperature was reaching 100F or above frequently and it sucked but it wasn’t that bad. Where I live in Cali and it gets that hot by the beach with humidity well into the 70% range sometimes I literally felt like I was about to die just sitting inside with a fan blowing right at me. Humidity is such a huge factor.
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 19:06
collapse
Oops you’re right. I just converted 1°C to kelvin and brain farted
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 19:04
collapse
Fahrenheit is what everyone feels. It’s a scale of 0 to 100 of how hot it is outside. Excluding extreme outliers, it covers the range of temperatures the average human might experience. In Celsius that’s like -20 to 40. I personally use Celsius anyway, because I don’t consider it much of an inconvenience, but Fahrenheit is certainly the more human-centric scale.
where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 23:18
collapse
This is no way describes how I feel. I almost never experience below -5C, e.g. like 20F, but from there down it doesn’t really matter if it’s 10F or -10F. You need special clothing and then you’re fine.
While my pain point is at 95F, most people I know consider “hot outside” being around 80F, and “unbearably hot outside” at around 88F. So, how is this intuitive?
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 00:06
nextcollapse
I almost never experience below -5C
Okay. Fahrenheit did. 0°F was supposedly based on the lowest air temperature he measured in his hometown.
This isn’t about pain points and special clothing, it’s about measuring the typical range of climate.
where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 16:37
collapse
Exactly. He did. I don’t. So, don’t push on me some guy’s hometown lowest temperature as a 0.
(Also he did a bit more than just measure the low of his hometown, but it sorta correlates to his location)
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 17:17
collapse
It’s a system designed to correlate to typical ambient temperatures, which it does. Just as Celsius is designed to correlate to water temperatures, and Kelvin is designed to correlate to absolute temperatures. Hence the top comment: Fahrenheit is how humans feel (range of climate temperatures humans live in), Celsius is how water feels (range of temperatures for liquid water), Kelvin is how the universe feels (range of all temperatures).
Denying the nature of the general scale because you don’t personally use the whole thing is as silly as calling Celsius pointless because you don’t personally use ice cubes.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:05
collapse
this is pretty well aligned with how it works here in the US as well. The idea is literally, anything below 0 f is “fucking cold” and anything above 100f is “fucking hot”
sure, 80f is pretty damn warm, that’s how numbers work, they have a range. It’s not like there’s a distinct point where “hotness” begins and “coldness” ends
90f is generally pretty hot, but it’s mostly tolerable, you drink water, you’ll be fine, once you get into the 100f range, you start to run into accidental heat exhaustion heat stroke problems if you aren’t really on top of it.
below 0f, your nose hairs are basically guaranteed to be frozen, and any facial hair you have is probably going to get frozen over time as well.
It’s a heuristic, you’re not supposed to treat it as an ultimatum.
This isn’t the case, because humans can handle significantly larger deviations from “comfortable” on the cold side than the hot side, so again Fahrenheit gets it pretty much right.
UlyssesT@hexbear.net
on 09 Sep 2024 18:25
nextcollapse
The correct rebuttal is that 69 degrees is ideal ambient temperature.
TheTetrapod@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:13
nextcollapse
Rating inflation. If someone called you a 5 or 6 out of 10, you’d feel bad. 7/10 is the bottom of acceptability, just like 72° is room temperature.
x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 19:43
collapse
That’s the most amount of copium I’ve seen on lemmy so far.
thefartographer@lemm.ee
on 09 Sep 2024 20:35
nextcollapse
You think that’s some copium, watch this:
When you’re a child having a sick-day, you get to stay home from school and watch TV, which is absolutely 💯. What temperature do you need to have to get a sick-day? 100°
In foreign units, 100° is the temperature at which water boils. What has boiling water ever done for anyone? Literally nothing. But in freedom units, water boils at 212°. 212 is a palindrome and palindromes are so cool, they could be classified as 💯. As we all know, 100 is the coolest number, which is why that’s how high grades go.
Finally, using USA standards, calculating calories in food merely requires measuring how much energy is required to raise 3.5 oz water 1.8° F by burning the food and then dividing by 1000. Using your weird unpatriotic methods, you’d have to measure how much energy is required to raise 100 grams of water 1° C by burning the food and then not dividing by anything??? Sounds lame!
Someone give me a Gatorade, those mental gymnastics were a hell of a workout
Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 23:56
collapse
Even better, I don’t even feel a fever until it’s 104°F. I’ve just looked it up, and that’s exactly 40°C. Even my body likes round centigrade numbers.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:35
collapse
riddle me this then mr european man (i assume for the context of shitposting)
would you feel ok with getting half of everything you did being completely wrong, or would you feel ok with only three of those 10 things being completely wrong.
half is formidable, like you tried, probably. 7/10 is on the way to being good at it though.
x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 17:47
collapse
I don’t understand this shitpost question.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 17:49
collapse
it’s a question surrounding human bias on the subject of correctness. Most people would argue that 7/10 is “ok or good” where as most people would argue that 5/10 is “not the worst, but not good”
we’re not fundamentally biased to the midpoint of something, we’re fundamentally biased to the perceived average of something.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:40
nextcollapse
Fahrenheit literally meant to base the scale with 100 being human body temp.
It was later rescaled by Cavendish to put the freezing point of water at exactly 32 and boiling point at exactly 212, giving a nicely-divisible 180-degree separation between freezing and boiling. That shift is why body temperature is 98.6.
morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 2024 20:16
nextcollapse
Horse* body temp
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:29
nextcollapse
I’m pretty sure that wasn’t actually Fahrenheit’s intention, more a happy accident. Also if your body temp is 100°F then you’re running a mild/moderate fever.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 21:00
nextcollapse
The scale was adjusted later to make freezing and boiling points land on exact numbers with an easily-divisible 180-dregrees between them (180 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, 36, 45, 60, and 90).
NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 21:28
collapse
The Report of the Committee Appointed by the Royal Society to Consider of the Best Method of Adjusting the Fixed Points of Thermometers; And of the Precautions Necessary to Be Used in Making Experiments with Those Instruments
Seems fancy and legit, I see no reason to actually read it and confirm the info.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:22
collapse
Welcome to peer review!
someguy3@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 00:56
nextcollapse
I heard circular thermometers were how it was done then so he lined up 180° with 180°.
Why should the ideal temperature be right in the middle of the range?
It’s no surprise that the maximum end of the range is right around the body temperature, as it’s difficult for the body to keep itself cool once the environment is around or warmer than the body temperature. Sure, we can sweat, but that uses up a lot of water and people generally find that getting all sweaty to not be pleasant. Run out of water or raise the temperature too much and it gets dangerous pretty quickly.
On the other hand, if the environment is a lot cooler than the body temperature, then it is difficult for the body to keep warm. I’m sure for our distant ancestors who lived in what is now Africa, their minimum temperature was much higher, possibly putting the ideal temperature right around the middle of their range. Luckily for us, we have clothing and can put on more clothing to stay warm, which is how we can now make the minimum so low. But while we can use clothing to lower our minimum, we really don’t have anything different to raise our maximum vs. our ancestors - we’re both limited by how well we can cool ourselves by sweating. So for that reason it doesn’t really surprise me that our ideal temperature is towards the upper end of what we consider the minimum and maximum temperatures.
Because it is in the middle of that “0 is really really cold, 100 is really really hot” “human feeling” fahrenheit scale you guys keep going on about.
ITGuyLevi@programming.dev
on 10 Sep 2024 22:14
collapse
This is the first time I’ve heard about a “human feeling” scale so sure, 50 must be perfect.
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:27
nextcollapse
As is typically responded to this ‘response’: there are a large number of people-many European-who would unironically say that 50°F (10°C) is, in fact, the ideal temperature.
They’re wrong, of course, but they exist.
But you’re also assuming that the exact middle of the range is where the ideal sweet spot should be. That’s wrong. People generally can better handle larger temperature deviations that are colder than their ideal than hotter deviations.
The difference is that humans emit their own heat. Combined with our funny tendency to wear insulative clothing that can asymptotically approach zero net heat exchange with the atmosphere, acceptable temperatures skew wildly towards and beyond freezing.
Meanwhile, without some kind of acting cooling mechanism, any temp even slightly above fever temp is inevitably fatal. You can only take off so many layers. What are you going to do, take off your skin? Sweating helps us humans a lot, but evaporative cooling can only do so much to reverse the heat gradient.
50 F is excellent… with a light jacket or a blanket. Not so much if you’re naked.
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:38
nextcollapse
otherwise 50° would be perfect temperature.
I love it when it’s 50ish out and sunny. You don’t get all sweaty, plus you can wear cozy socks and sweaters or just go out in short sleeves and both are perfectly fine. The bugs all start going into hiding at that temperature but the grass and leaves are still green
akilou@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 21:00
nextcollapse
50 degrees is a damn good temperature. I won’t stand here and let you besmirch 50 degrees.
Its not the “perfect” temperature but what temp in celcius is “perfect”? What a ridiculously proposition that there’s a perfect temperature.
sznowicki@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 21:10
collapse
20 is perfect.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:32
collapse
that’s pretty comfortable, but between 50 and 70f which is about 10 and 20 c is the “comfortable range”
where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
on 09 Sep 2024 23:04
nextcollapse
As a European I can perfectly feel the 0 degree. I step outside and 5 seconds later I can tell you if it’s below zero or not.
For me “it’s now really hot” in summer is exactly when it’s over 30C. It being 86F doesn’t make any more sense. Approximately above 35C I will avoid going outside. Which would be 95F, not 100.
From here, the temps in summer in the south of Europe are often around 100F at peak. Above or below doesn’t matter.
All that Fahrenheit scale is good for is if you live in a continental climate, more to the south, e.g. some useless place like Oklahoma, where 0F is approximately year low, and 100F is approximately year high.
For all other places, where the temperature delta over the course of the year is not as extreme, this Fahrenheit scale is as unintuitive as celcius, e.g. you just get used to it.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:28
collapse
For me “it’s now really hot” in summer is exactly when it’s over 30C. It being 86F doesn’t make any more sense. Approximately above 35C I will avoid going outside. Which would be 95F, not 100. From here, the temps in summer in the south of Europe are often around 100F at peak. Above or below doesn’t matter.
you guys need to stop converting directly between temperatures, you’re right at 86f, bump it up to 90f and woah, suddenly it’s actually a nice round number.
You’re too conversion pilled to realize that the human experience isn’t fundamentally and objectively representative. 1 degree celsius isn’t super noticeable, just like 5 degrees fahrenheit isn’t super noticeable either.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:26
collapse
Fahrenheit isn’t how people feel, otherwise 50° would be perfect temperature.
it is though? It’s like perfectly comfortable because you can dress up just enough to where you’re actually wearing a decent bit of clothing, but you can also dress down to a pretty light set of clothing as well.
This is also ignoring that this is both, arbitrary, and also completely subjective to the person.
The human body might end up liking 70f more than 50f, purely because it’s 96f inside the body, so something lower to allow heat transfer, but not low enough to be physically uncomfortable would be more expected.
Actually, here’s a good question, why do you land on the 50f point? Are you expecting the middle to be the most optimal point of perfection? Or is this just a metric brain thing?
Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 21:52
nextcollapse
Fahrenheit is literally a German dude making a scale from, “scheiße its chilly outside” to “oh mein gott, its hot out!”
What annoys me about that phrasing, is that “how water feels” is quite relevant to how humans feel.
The obvious example is that if it’s below 0°C, it starts freezing, which causes slippery sidewalks, snow, dry air, all that stuff.
But just in general having a feeling how much water will evaporate and later precipitate at certain temperatures, and even stuff like how hot beverages and cooking temperatures are, it’s all still relevant for humans…
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:23
nextcollapse
The obvious example is that if it’s below 0°C, it starts freezing, which causes slippery sidewalks, snow, dry air, all that stuff.
But just in general having a feeling how much water will evaporate and later precipitate at certain temperatures, and even stuff like how hot beverages and cooking temperatures are, it’s all still relevant for humans…
that’s an interesting idea, BUT, the boiling point for water also exists under f as well, it’s just 212 f, which if you want to round for convenience, is 200f. 100f is just about half the boiling point of water.
I guess you celsius folks might be more water pilled than the average US citizen, but it’s not like it’s impossible.
andshit@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 05:07
nextcollapse
In Celcius water boils at exactly 100°C, and you don’t have to round, and 50°C is exactly half the boiling point of water.
Yes, Celsius users are waterpilled: the whole system is based on the temperature at which water freezes and evaporates at 1 atm pressure.
(You’re just fucking with us right? Like Celsius is has a coarser base unit, and the range applicable to human temperatures are not such pretty numbers, but you can’t be seriously thinking Fahrenheit makes more sense for when we talk about water?)
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:20
collapse
In Celcius water boils at exactly 100°C, and you don’t have to round, and 50°C is exactly half the boiling point of water.
unless you’re doing literal chemistry, the specific boiling point of the water doesn’t matter, especially for any subjective referential experiences you might have, such as, going outside.
(You’re just fucking with us right? Like Celsius is has a coarser base unit, and the range applicable to human temperatures are not such pretty numbers, but you can’t be seriously thinking Fahrenheit makes more sense for when we talk about water?)
i’m not saying it’s better, i’m just saying you’re having a failure of imagination to conceptualize the usage of the fahrenheit system if you so pleased to use it in such a specific manner, which almost nobody here does. You could still do it though.
a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:56
collapse
Cooking is basically water based chemistry, so it makes a lot of sense to use Celsius.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 19:30
collapse
idk man, there’s a lot of temperatures in cooking that are like, kind of close? Not that close, but like, kind of close. Even then, the one case where i consider it genuinely mattering is boiling water which like, you can just kinda know.
Your scale in water terms starts at 32. 100 is nowhere near halfway between 32 and 212
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 15 Sep 2024 02:34
collapse
the celsius scale literally covers 55% of the range of the fahrenheit scale. I’d say “about half” is perfectly reasonable.
granted, it skews since you’re starting on the low end. The figure is more like 122f right in the middle, which is, not great, but i wasn’t going to calculate the half boiling point as i’ve literally never seen it be relevant anywhere lol.
Celcius degrees are quite a bit larger than Fahrenheit degrees. 0 to 100C is much larger than 0 to 100F so I don’t get what you mean by Celcius covering about half of Fahrenheit. In any case neither scale runs out of numbers high or low
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 16 Sep 2024 19:50
collapse
my main point was that accuracy matters a lot less with fahrenheit, because it’s so much broader. a range of about 10 degrees fahrenheit is the average subjectively experienced “change” in temperature, at least on the higher end, where there’s more difference between the individual numbers. On the cold side there’s a lot less variance as it meets at about -40 in both systems.
In any case neither scale runs out of numbers high or low
this is very true though, hard to run out of numbers when you can just make more up, although there is an ultimate limit in either direction, due to what temperature actually measures. That’s a physics thing though.
The words you are looking for are that Fahrenheit is more precise. But it’s not as there are an infinity of numbers between any two integers.
My thermometer at work which I use for health and safety stuff reports temperature to two decimal places. Had we wanted more precision we could have gone with twenty decimal places. In too big or too small metric units we use multipliers - metres are too small for long distances so we use kilometres (thousands of metres), metres are too big for construction so we use millimetres (thousandths of metres)
Where Celcius degrees are too big, people (scientists, since whole degrees or a single decimal is enough for everyone else) use milikelvins
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 18 Sep 2024 02:22
collapse
The words you are looking for are that Fahrenheit is more precise. But it’s not as there are an infinity of numbers between any two integers.
yeah and you could make a temperature scale call it fuckwit and make water freeze at -1, and water room temperature at 0, and then make it boil at 1. I don’t know why you would want to do that though.
My thermometer at work which I use for health and safety stuff reports temperature to two decimal places. Had we wanted more precision we could have gone with twenty decimal places. In too big or too small metric units we use multipliers - metres are too small for long distances so we use kilometres (thousands of metres), metres are too big for construction so we use millimetres (thousandths of metres)
well you wouldn’t go with twenty decimal spaces because after you get past about 4 decimals, it starts to become inconsequential, and you should really just use sci no anyway.
Where Celcius degrees are too big, people (scientists, since whole degrees or a single decimal is enough for everyone else) use milikelvins
fascinating that you propose this, because this is literally the opposite of what i said lol.
TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:24
nextcollapse
I think the reason people are saying that Fahrenheit “feels” right is because we use a base 10 number system. 1-10 and 0%-100% feel right to us because of this. If you somehow knew nothing about each temperature unit, but you did know base 10, I feel like Fahrenheit would be more intuitive. Obviously if you grew up with Celsius that would feel normal.
Disclaimer: I feel like the US needs to adopt metric already. It’s so much better.
mcSibiss@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 03:30
nextcollapse
Use the same logic to use km/h then.
0 to 100 is better than 0 to 60.
TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 12:02
collapse
60mph/97kmh is not that fast, though. 90mph/157kmh is pretty fast.
Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
on 10 Sep 2024 04:29
collapse
If you somehow knew nothing about each temperature unit, but you did know base 10, I feel like Fahrenheit would be more intuitive.
Would it though? Because it’s not like people who didn’t grew up with Fahrenheit can just intuitively use and interpret it. Maybe base ten is “more intuitive”, but I’d argue not to any meaningful degree. Both scales have to be explained, experienced, and tied to personal reference points.
suzune@ani.social
on 09 Sep 2024 19:25
nextcollapse
What? 100°F is too mild. It doesn’t even boil water!
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:01
collapse
mild in what way? Do you live in death valley??? Have you ever experienced 100f? You can literally get heat exhaustion, and heat stroke from temperatures of 110f pretty easily if you aren’t watching yourself, we remind ourselves of this constantly anytime it gets hot.
uienia@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 11:49
nextcollapse
They are referring to the fact that 100 celsius literally boils water.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:26
collapse
It’s slightly above my core body temperature. So yes, literally I experience it all the time.
You can literally get heat exhaustion, and heat stroke from temperatures of 110f pretty easily
Sauna. It’s literally boiled water. And it’s pretty safe for average human.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 23:42
collapse
It doesn’t even boil water.
yeah and? Last i checked i’m not a pot of water.
It’s slightly above my core body temperature. So yes, literally I experience it all the time.
to be clear, it’s not slightly above, it’s high enough that you’re getting into fever range, a few degrees over that and it starts to become deadly. 105f internal temp is potentially fatal so.
the average body temperature ranges about 2 degree fahrenheit. 97f to 99f that’s about the entire extent of that. 100F specifically is slightly over that in terms of general temperature experience.
Sauna. It’s literally boiled water. And it’s pretty safe for average human.
thank god, i was about to do hard labor in a sauna. Not to mention this is also a sauna, not direct infrared and UV exposure to direct sunlight. Not to mention the literal temperature of the environment around it, and the indirect reflected heating that you’ll receive.
guess i should now argue that cold temperatures aren’t dangerous because people do ice baths regularly.
repungnant_canary@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:29
nextcollapse
When you use Celsius from birth 41C does make you say FORTY ONE DEGREES?!!!
Woht24@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 19:57
nextcollapse
100%
It’s just Americans having American perspectives promoted as world views.
Takumidesh@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 21:08
nextcollapse
It’s about crossing into triple digits, a new order of magnitude, it feels heavy.
Morphit@feddit.uk
on 09 Sep 2024 21:42
nextcollapse
… for you.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 22:19
nextcollapse
But it’s also underwhelming when your usual reference for over 100 is, “WHAT IT’S HOT ENOUGH TO BOIL WATER OUTSIDE!?”
MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 23:25
nextcollapse
American: IT’S A HUNDRED AND SEVEN DEGREES OUTSIDE
Civilized people: no it fucking ain’t, you overdramatic princess
It doesn’t really though for people who doesn’t use fahrenheit.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:20
collapse
brother, that’s what a world view is lmao, do you not understand this concept?
Most of us don’t really go anywhere outside of the US, the entire continental US is the literal equivalent of the collective EU. What do you want me to say? I literally don’t need to leave to US to experience something geographically unique.
Ezergill@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 07:39
nextcollapse
I think they’ve meant world’s view, not worldview
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:32
collapse
im pretty sure the world’s view would be that we’re parasites destroying the well balanced nature of the ecology of the earth, but that’s just me.
Geographically perhaps. But the cultural and historical unique is something you are going to miss out on by staying inside your own home country for your entire life. You think your US regional differences are the same as the differences between two countries, but anyone who has experienced different countries will tell you in an instant that that is not so.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:31
collapse
i mean culturally in terms of outside of the continental US sure. There’s plenty of interesting and unique culture within the US if you just go looking for it. Though a lot of it is going to be somewhat westernized in essence. If you want more eastern culture, obviously you’re going to have to go farther east, but i feel like that’s a given.
Don_alForno@feddit.org
on 09 Sep 2024 20:08
nextcollapse
On the other hand, if it was 107°C outside, the outrage would be so much more justified.
noerdman@discuss.tchncs.de
on 09 Sep 2024 20:24
collapse
But much less vocal.
You know, because we’d all be dead.
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:21
nextcollapse
Yeah, but it hits different. Smaller number is smaller.
That’s why I use Kelvin. THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN DEGREES?!!
chiliedogg@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 20:32
nextcollapse
Should use Rankine with that logic. It comes out to 566.
deus@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 20:51
nextcollapse
Degrees? While using Kelvin?? OP is a phony!
luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
on 09 Sep 2024 21:17
collapse
I’d excuse it as part of the joke
quantenzitrone@lemmings.world
on 10 Sep 2024 11:05
collapse
Why not Centikelvin?
THIRTY ONE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED CENTIKELVIN??!!!
NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 18:39
collapse
Who is kelvin and why the fuck are his numbers so large
abbadon420@lemm.ee
on 09 Sep 2024 20:27
nextcollapse
No, he’s right. The “one hundred” part really does add certain powers, Austin Powers
Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 21:30
nextcollapse
Krauerking@lemy.lol
on 09 Sep 2024 19:29
nextcollapse
I’m gonna be honest. I love Celsius for the the whole perfect math reasons with calories and water based measurement…
But the curve on temps is a pain when all the nice temperatures require using a decimal place to decide just how slightly above or below pleasant it is but cold is basically everything from 16°C to -30°C
And then decimals really matter when hotter than pleasant temps.
Whole rounded integers are just so vastly different depending how high or low you are in Celsius.
grepehu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 19:39
collapse
I don’t know man, I’ve lived my entire life in a country that only uses Celsius and I’ve never seen a single place or person using decimals to display temperature we always use whole numbers.
I get your point but the difference in 1 degree in Celsius is still very insignificant to the point we don’t really need decimals at all.
Krauerking@lemy.lol
on 09 Sep 2024 20:32
nextcollapse
I’ve been all over the world. Trust me seeing 21.6 or other decimals is not uncommon you and others are really just pushing hard on the ideas that there is no flaws and none of the quirks of Celsius.
I literally just set an air conditioner to 20.5°C. I don’t get why lie like this.
shinratdr@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 20:51
nextcollapse
The reason you see fractions is BECAUSE of Fahrenheit. Your air conditioner is designed to work in multiple regions and so it works on steps. Easier to just map the half steps to Fahrenheit degrees and call it a day.
For non-electronic usage, people just say the round number.
No this was an airconditioner built for and used in Japan only. It’s only in Celsius. It just uses decimal point options for finer control. I have been in plenty of places that only use Celsius and use decimals especially higher than 20s.
And still doesn’t change the drastic change between the whole numbers the higher you go vs lower temps.
Edit: literally my fever thermometer uses decimals to help you get a proper temperature reading between normal and fever.
shinratdr@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 21:06
nextcollapse
Whatever it was it was intended for it was built in China for a global audience, then customized for whatever market it was sold in. They all use common software platforms.
It does indeed change that fact, because temperature is exclusively reported in whole numbers. Go to any weather channel, site, provider, etc. It’s always whole numbers, even in Celsius.
It truly doesn’t matter.
grepehu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Sep 2024 21:02
collapse
Sure the thermometer is the one place I remember decimals, but I can guarantee you no one I’ve ever met in my life knows the difference between 25 and 26 degrees celsius, much less decimals of it.
Specially air conditioners, they all have arrows to go up and down the temperature, you’re literally just speaking from a very specific experience of one special air conditioner that had more control than most others.
keepcarrot@hexbear.net
on 09 Sep 2024 23:49
nextcollapse
Huh, I can only speak from my experience. I have a couple of thermometers in my room that give decimals, but my air con doesn’t give decimal options and the government meteorological service doesn’t either. I certainly don’t think I can tell the difference between 39 and 39.2.
grepehu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Sep 2024 20:59
collapse
That’s a really weird one, every apartment I’ve lived at the air conditioner only displays the temperature in integers and I’m 100% sure of that because every each one of them had arrows to change the temperature up or down in one unit.
Meh I’m about 50/50 4 air conditioners in. Half degrees has not been all that uncommon and it’s up and down arrows to adjust it. I don’t get the handwaving of legitimate points of comtention to make Celsius seem more perfect. Everything has its flaws. It’s completely fine to admit that.
grepehu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Sep 2024 21:06
collapse
That’s not the point, I haven’t said Celsius is perfect not a single time here, I’m just calling your BS because you said decimals matter for us which is not true because no one that lives in a country that uses Celsius knows the difference a decimal makes, I honestly think we just really feel some difference at like 2 degrees in variation, far from decimals.
Decimals don’t matter for you and you are pushing that to everyone as a way to delegitimize my point.
I use Celsius and they matter to me. I can and do notice a difference between setting my thermostat to 21.5 vs 22 vs 22.5. You don’t whatever.
I said I was using Celsius but because I had a complaint you decided I was outside of your accepted user group and my statement was BS.
Its bullshit.
grepehu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Sep 2024 21:24
collapse
Yeah your point is BS, because you really don’t need decimals to do most things. Good for you that you can notice decimals in difference but that’s not a normal thing, most weather forecast only say the integer, most air conditioners (all as far as I’ve seen) tell the temperature in integer, if you talk to someone else about the weather we also talk in integer.
YOU should stop pushing the idea that decimals are important into everyone else as if they are true for everyone, because they’re not.
Takumidesh@lemmy.world
on 09 Sep 2024 21:12
nextcollapse
jpablo68@infosec.pub
on 09 Sep 2024 19:54
nextcollapse
good point, but to us Celsius fans or “Celsilovers” over one hundred sounds like the apocalypse.
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 09 Sep 2024 20:32
nextcollapse
Which is the closest thing to a legitimate criticism of celcius that exists. The entire top half of the scale (everything over ~50°, that is) is pretty much useless as far as judging the weather is concerned.
Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 23:59
nextcollapse
Top half? 0-50°C is the top half. The bottom half is -50-0°C.
Nakoichi@hexbear.net
on 10 Sep 2024 09:04
collapse
I am being forced to learn celsius by my non American friends. Call me an incelsius.
watersnipje@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 09 Sep 2024 20:37
nextcollapse
FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED MILLICELCIUS?!
shinratdr@lemmy.ca
on 09 Sep 2024 21:00
nextcollapse
For proof that this thread is just people justifying what they know as better somehow, look no further than Canada.
We do cooking temps in Fahrenheit, weather in Celsius. Human weights in pounds, but never pounds and oz. Food weights in grams, cooking weights in pounds and oz. Liquid volume in millilitres and litres, but cooking in cups, teaspoons and tablespoons. Speed & distance in kilometres, heights in feet and inches.
Try and give this any consistency and people will look at you like you’re fucked. The next town is 100km over, I’m 5ft 10in, a can of soda is 355ml, it’s 21c out and I have the oven roasting something at 400f. Tell me it’s 68f out and I will fight you.
People like what they are used to, and will bend over backwards to justify it. This becomes blatantly obvious when you use a random mix of units like we do, because you realize that all that matters is mental scale.
If Fahrenheit is “how people feel” then why are feet useful measurements of height when 90% of people are between 4ft and 6ft? They aren’t. You just know the scale in your head, so when someone says they’re 7ft tall you say “dang that’s tall”. That’s it.
IntheTreetop@lemm.ee
on 09 Sep 2024 21:17
nextcollapse
This makes a lot of sense, and why I’d never survive in Canada.
If an argument is being made for one thing, Fahrenheit, it’s not relevant to bring up a different thing. Why is feet a useful measurement? Maybe it’s not, we’re talking about temperature.
WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 01:20
collapse
Yeah like the metric system has good arguments for why it’s measurements and weights are better, mainly conversion being easier, but for temperature there really isn’t an argument. I would make an argument for Fahrenheit as it gives more precision without having to use decimals which at least in America isn’t a thing for temperature. But those are pretty minor things and I do tend to agree it comes down to what you grew up with.
uienia@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 11:35
nextcollapse
without having to use decimals
This fear of decimals is a strictly American thing. Celsius achieves more precision with decimals than fahrenheit without decimals. And this American fear of decimals is pretty funny, considering you will happily do advanced fractions as soon as you are doing length measurements.
WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 17:26
collapse
I don’t mind decimals at all, it’s more that I don’t trust companies to actually deal with supporting decimals when making the switch. Plus the last time I discussed this on Lemmy someone was saying that decimals aren’t even universally used and it might depend on what you get whether you get that precision or not. Either way like the main point of my post was anyways these are minor arguments and at the end of the day there isn’t really a reason to use Celsius vs Fahrenheit.
Can you feel the difference between 23.5° and 24? I can’t. You don’t often need precision to tenths.
In Australia most weather providers give you whole degrees, the bureau of meteorology gives you to one decimal in reports and whole degrees in forecasts
My coffee and beer boilers can hit high precision temperatures to variously 0.1° or 0.5° precision. The beer boiler gives 3 digits - hundredths below 10°, tenths below 100°, whole numbers 100° and over
You can choose the precision of thermometers you wish to buy for yourself
I have seen fahrenheit thermometers which are hard to read to better precision than 5 degrees
1cm3 of water weights 1 gr and needs 1 calorie to rise 1ºC.
But calories are now obsolete and the unit is Joules.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:19
collapse
i still don’t see how this is intentionally obtuse, feet are a mid point between inches and yards, it just makes sense to break down things over a certain amount to a much more palatable scale. Everyone knows roughly what 1 ft is, and everyone knows roughly what 1 inch is. Paired together you can get a pretty rough and accurate guesstimate of height. I feel like it’s also pretty expected for it to be within the range of 4-6 ft. Most people don’t really measure feet outside of that range, unless you’re doing construction.
humans are a comparatively arbitrary height so i feel like you’re just complaining about the height of humans being weirdly arbitrary? Out of all the systems you could use for height, ft and in is pretty well tuned to the human nature, you’re not gonna do much better.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 09 Sep 2024 23:12
nextcollapse
We do cooking temps in Fahrenheit, weather in Celsius.
Fahrenheit: let’s use “really cold weather” as zero and “really hot weather” as 100.
Celsius: let’s use “freezing water” as zero, and “boiling water” as 100.
Etterra@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 02:20
nextcollapse
Celsius is for scientists and nerds, Fahrenheit is for normal idiots. It’s not rocket surgery.
overcast5348@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 02:39
collapse
Fahrenheit: let’s use “really cold weather” as zero and really hot weather as 100.
I don’t really have a horse in this race but this logic doesn’t seem legit to me.
How is -17°C really cold weather AND 37°C really hot weather?
One is actively trying to kill you if weren’t already dead by the time the weather got that bad. The other just makes your nuts stick to your thighs – if you’re in a humid place.
I’d agree with the logic if 100F was equal to something like 65°C. 🤷♂️
C126@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 02:45
nextcollapse
Thank you. That argument bugs the heck out of me.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:15
collapse
maybe it’s a climate thing? Where do you live, here in ameica it’s quite literally the best way to describe it. We see swings below 0f at the coldest parts of the year, and upwards of 100+ in the hottest parts of the year.
C126@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 10:43
collapse
So why not make the temperature go to the hottest? Let me guess, 0 isn’t the coldest either in America, right? It’s just so arbitrary, and pure cope to say it’s the best way to describe temperature.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:38
nextcollapse
why not make it more arbitrary? Why not leave metric rules and use something like twelve that has fractions? Because it’s nice. It’s pleasing having it be 0f and 100f, it’s a clean range, and it’s also pretty comprehensive in terms of the temperature variance.
It just happens to work out pretty nicely.
You’re literally just applying the anti-thesis of the metric system to the question, and asking me why we don’t do it that way, idk what you’re expecting me to say here.
do celsius users not consider something like -20c to be “pretty cold” and 40c to be “pretty hot” That’s equally as arbitrary.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 10 Sep 2024 20:29
nextcollapse
It’s just so arbitrary
All of them are. The decision to use water at all is completely arbitrary. Even Kelvin and Rankine are completely arbitrary: the “width” of the degrees is not defined by a physical factor, but relative to an entirely arbitrary concept.
C126@sh.itjust.works
on 11 Sep 2024 10:49
nextcollapse
Technically all arbitrary, but Fahrenheit is definitely on a whole different level of arbitrary.
Celsius - 0 = precise freezing point of water and 100 = precise boiling point
Kelvin - same as C, but shifted so 0 is the precise lowest possible temperature
Fahrenheit - 0 is the imprecise freezing point of some random brine mixture, 100 is the imprecise average body temperature of the developer
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 11 Sep 2024 14:40
collapse
100 is the imprecise average body temperature of the developer
That’s a myth. It’s no more true than the myth that it was the body temperature of horses, or that the scale was designed to reflect how humans experience the weather. (It happens to reflect how humans experience the weather, but this was an incidental characteristic and not the purpose for which the scale was designed.)
The Fahrenheit scale starts to make sense when you realize he was a geometrist. It turns out that a base-10 system of angular measurement objectively sucks ass, so the developer wasn’t particularly interested geometrically irrelevant numbers like “100”, but in geometrically interesting numbers like “180”. He put 180 degrees between the freezing and boiling points of water. (212F - 32F = 180F)
After settling on the “width” of his degree, he measured down to a repeatable origin point, which happened to be 32 of his degrees below the freezing point of water. He wanted a dial thermometer to point straight down in ice water, straight up in boiling water, and to use the same angular degrees as a protractor.
The calibration point he chose wasn’t the “freezing point” of the “random brine mixture”. The brine was water, ice, and ammonium chloride, which together form a frigorific mixture due to the phase change of the water. As the mixture is cooled, it resists getting colder than 0F due to the phase change of the water to ice. As it is warmed, it resists getting warmer than 0F due to the phase change of ice to water. (Obviously, it can’t maintain this relationship indefinitely. But so long as there is ice and liquid brine, the brine will maintain this temperature.) This makes it repeatable, in labs around the world.
And it wasn’t a “random” brine mixture: it was the coldest and most stable frigorific mixture known to the scientific community.
This criticism of Fahrenheit is borne of simple ignorance: people don’t understand how or why it was developed, and assume he was an idiot. He wasn’t. He had very good reasons for his choices.
C126@sh.itjust.works
on 11 Sep 2024 18:06
collapse
That was a long way of saying what I said, you just don’t see faranheit as ludicrously out of date, while I (and most of the world) do. Live your life as you wish friend. It’s a random brine mixture. Maybe it was less random back then, but now it’s an arbitrary mixture of water and salts in arbitrary ratios. Deal with it. Fahrenheit sucks.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 11 Sep 2024 20:15
collapse
Every measurement system has had its formal definition changed several times. The kilogram, for example, was once formally defined as the mass of a specific block of metal in France, which was later determined to be losing mass, and thus made a pretty terrible standard. Now, the kilogram is formally defined in terms of the meter and the Planck Constant.
Celsius was once defined by the freezing and boiling points of water, but those aren’t actually constant: Fahrenheit’s brine mixture is actually significantly more consistent. Kelvin’s degree spacing comes from that definition of Celsius, but it it was eventually redefined to be more precise by using the triple point of water: pure water at a specific pressure and temperature where it can simultaneously exist as solid, liquid, and gas. Significantly more accurate, but not enough: Kelvin was redefined in 2019 in terms of joules, which are in turn defined by kg, m, s, which are ultimately defined in terms of the Planck constant.
Celsius is now formally defined in terms of Kelvin. Fahrenheit is also formally defined in terms of Kelvin. Fahrenheit’s brine story is just a piece of trivia.
We live on a water planet. The weather we care about is water.
If you look at the overnight low you probably want to know if frost was likely. Guess what Celcius temperature frost happens at.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 15 Sep 2024 01:43
collapse
That factoid makes celsius relevant for about 4 out of the 12 months, and humans lack the capacity to distinguish between 60-100 on the Celsius scale. Anything at those temperatures just feels like blisters.
The high end of 0 to 100 is nice for boiling, when I’m making beer at the boiling stage the number on the scale goes from somewhere below 25 to 100 and so the end point is obvious
We boil water quite a lot, though we often aren’t tracking the temperature
Most of the time the temperature scale that’s best is the one you know. I don’t know of any case where Fahrenheit is objectively best (like Celcius is when water is involved) but I think the best argument for Celcius is it is used in science, so American scientists start a step behind all the others by having to learn a new system. Given neither have any great advantage I reckon it’s worth America changing to make things better for American scientists
That’s quite an error in a “whole human experience in zero to one hundred” system
phobiac@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 03:30
nextcollapse
It makes no sense because that’s not what the 0 of the Fahrenheit scale is. The 0 point is the coldest an ammonium chloride brine mixture can be cooled to. The 90 point was an estimated average for human body temperature (it was adjusted up over time). These were chosen because the goal of the scale was to provide a way for people to have a defined temperature scale with a range and degree size that could be reliably reproduced without passing around standardized tools. 100 is really hot because human bodies were used as a reference for the high end, but the low end has nothing to do with the human body.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 10 Sep 2024 06:23
nextcollapse
Geometric construction plays a role in there as well: the 180 degrees between the boiling point and the freezing point of water was not accidental.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
on 10 Sep 2024 15:55
nextcollapse
but like isn’t that the whole point of celsius? all you need to calibrate a C thermometer is some water: when it starts freezing it’s 0°C and when it’s boiling it’s 100°C, super simple and accessible.
It’s not like “the estimated average human body temperature” is particularly accurate, and surely no matter what you mix into water it won’t magically boil at the same temperature regardless of air pressure?
You’re totally correct that Celsius is the more sensible scale with easier to replicate reference points (when using water). It was also invented almost 30 years after the Fahrenheit scale and with all the insights gained from that period of technological advancement. In fact in the modern day the Celsius degree size is defined in reference to the Boltzmann constant since Celsius is essentially the Kelvin scale with the numbers moved around.
It also used 100 as the freezing point of water and 0 as the boiling point when originally proposed, which changed after Anders Celsius died because everyone knew that was a weird way to do it.
As I understand it, yes it was a saturated solution.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:14
nextcollapse
0f is pretty fucking cold outside, your nose hairs start to freeze in this weather. It’s genuinely uncomfortable and you can die pretty easily if you aren’t prepared for it. 100f is similar, anything over 100f and you start to get into straight heat exhaustion and potential heat stroke region of danger. it’s really not that bad? Sure if you’re like, standing outside doing nothing in the shade, you’ll be fine, but do some labor and you might meet the fabled heat exhaustion fairy.
Obviously, when you convert it to celsius, it seems really fucking weird, That’s pretty normal for conversions though. Like just to be clear, if you round these numbers, they make more sense. -20 c and “damn it’s really cold out” you round up to 40c and “damn it’s really hot out”
also im not really sure what you’re trying to say, but 0f isn’t like, going to kill you kill you, it’s not pleasant, but in the right attire you’ll be fine. -20 f and you start getting closer, -40f and you really start having to think about it. Are you aussie or something? This scale seems really shifted up to me. “nuts sticking weather” is like 80f and humid here.
overcast5348@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 12:12
collapse
I’m saying that 0F is waaaaaaay more dangerous than 100F so the logic of those particular temperatures being the 0-100 ends of the scale can’t be explained by how dangerous they each are.
Almost everyone would be fine staying outside for 30 minutes at 100F without no external help (shade, cool drinks etc). Almost nobody would be fine after staying outside at 0F without external help (parka, thermals etc).
To me, with absolutely no data, it feels lie:
0F is as dangerous as 140F (you’re long dead if you’re outside in both cases)
100F is as dangerous as 40F (mildly uncomfortable but safe for a while)
So calling 0F and 100F both “really dangerous” and using that to justify them being the respective points of 0 and 100 disingenuous. Like, use Fahrenheit if that’s what you’re used to - I use it too because that’s what I’m used to. But I don’t explain the insane system with “it’s because the two ends are reallllly dangerous.”
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:19
collapse
I’m saying that 0F is waaaaaaay more dangerous than 100F so the logic of those particular temperatures being the 0-100 ends of the scale can’t be explained by how dangerous they each are.
idk about that though, i mean maybe if you go outside completely naked, sure. But idk who would be doing that. I’ve regularly been outside in close to 0f temperature in lighter clothing, it’s not pleasant, but im not going to freeze to death within twenty minutes. Plus you can also do physical activity, and as long as you regulate sweat, you’ll be fine. Although sweat can be particularly dangerous in colder weather.
Almost everyone would be fine staying outside for 30 minutes at 100F without no external help (shade, cool drinks etc). Almost nobody would be fine after staying outside at 0F without external help (parka, thermals etc).
i think that’s unreasonable though, you just wouldn’t be going outside at all in those clothes, in the same way that you wouldn’t go outside in 100f weather in a full winter get up. You would literally die.
140f as a relative measure is wild to me, in 140f if you’re outside without an air conditioned vehicle (death valley) and you don’t have water you will die within about a day. 100-130f is considered “extreme heat” in death valley, which has a website that you can pull up for some relevant information. Once your body is over about 110f internal temperature, you’re fucking dead. Unless you have a way to either redirect sunlight from hitting you, and water to replenish that lost from sweat, you die really quickly.
0f isn’t considered “extreme cold” that would be something like -40c (or f, they’re the same) where basically everything starts to freeze, and i’ve seen people do overnight camping in that weather. It’s perfectly doable, obviously not without gear, but who isn’t bringing gear? Hell you can bring a space blanket with you, with the right gear you can easily exist in 0f weather for a prolonged period.
I’m not sure where you’re quoting the “really dangerous” from because i just said both of them are “really hot/cold”
But I don’t explain the insane system with “it’s because the two ends are reallllly dangerous.”
did i say this anywhere??? I feel like i’m schizophrenic.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 10 Sep 2024 04:48
collapse
Every time a heat wave brings 100F, the news starts reporting about old people dying. Every time the temperatures reach zero, same thing.
Personally, I can handle the cold much easier than the heat. I get stupid-brain working more than 30 minutes at 95F. Another 15 minutes and I can’t catch my breath, lose fine motor control, and start feeling faint. Drenching myself in water - the colder the better - every 20 minutes or so is the only way I’ve found to be productive above 100F. I feel like 100F is actively trying to kill me.
0F is where it starts getting difficult for me to stay warm without an additional heat source.
overcast5348@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 11:59
collapse
Lmao are you a penguin or something? Please tell me that you’re exaggerating to make a point and aren’t seriously saying that you’re capable of staying warm at -10°C (14°F) “without an additional heat source.”
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
on 10 Sep 2024 15:08
collapse
I mean, I have clothes. Long underwear? Layers? Coats, gloves, hats, scarves?
They say you can always put on more clothes if you’re cold, but that’s not really true. Insulation adds bulk, and bulk reduces mobility. Around 0F is where I start to have real trouble wearing enough clothing to stay warm while still being able to perform the activity that has me outside in that weather. Somewhere around 0F, clothing doesn’t really cut it, and I need shelter or additional heat.
overcast5348@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 17:02
collapse
That’s a lot of moved goalposts to justify the weird temperature scale logic but okay.
You’ve essentially justified that 0F and 100F are what they are because some old people died when it was 100F (most people, including the old are perfectly fine at this temperature all around the world) and because you can manage at 0F while wearing a ton of layers and not need a heat source (do all old people manage to survive just fine at 10F or 20F by just putting on some layers?).
Either way, this pointless conversation had gone on for way too long. Have a good day! :)
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:08
nextcollapse
then why are feet useful measurements of height when 90% of people are between 4ft and 6ft? They aren’t. You just know the scale in your head, so when someone says they’re 7ft tall you say “dang that’s tall”. That’s it.
to be clear, we use feet and inches, and there is historical precedent for breaking things down once they get past a certain grouping, we only have 10 fingers after all. To me the difference between 200cm and 220 is literally fuck all. You ask me the difference between 4 ft and 6ft and i can pretty quickly tell you.
I find it weird that when measuring height in metric, people using cm exclusively, i’ve noticed this a lot actually, people will use cm or mm in places where it arguably doesn’t make any sense. I could see the justification for doing math maybe, but like, that defeats the whole point of it being metric no?
Shouldn’t you be using meters and cm for height specifically? Since most people are a good bit over one meter i feel like it would make sense to do it that way. But then again that’s just kind of a shit bucket worth of options you have, ideally you would use decimeters, but nobody uses those things for some reason.
shinratdr@lemmy.ca
on 10 Sep 2024 04:10
nextcollapse
Most of Europe just uses metres for people’s height. 1.67m, like that. I have no mental picture of that, so it doesn’t work for me. But they don’t seem to have any trouble, further evidence that it’s all just what you know.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:26
collapse
hm, that’s weird, i’ve seen this first hand in a handful of cases, guess i just get the weird ones. Granted i still see it holding true in things like construction, where i guess it makes more sense, but it seems weirdly arbitrary to me.
TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 04:42
nextcollapse
I find it weird that when measuring height in metric, people using cm exclusively, i’ve noticed this a lot actually, people will use cm or mm in places where it arguably doesn’t make any sense. I could see the justification for doing math maybe, but like, that defeats the whole point of it being metric no?
Why is that defeating the whole point of being metric? If you know someone is 183 cm tall, you also know that they are 1.83 m tall. If its easier to say the length in cm, you do. No need for “one meter and eighty-three centimeters” or “one point eighty-three meters”, just “a hundred and eighty-three centimeters”. Often you just skip saying the “centimeters” part as well, because most people can see that you’re not the size of a skyscraper without getting a ruler out.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:28
collapse
yeah idk, i guess it’s just weird to me, because here in the us if you measured someones height in inches alone, you would be chased out of a room. We strictly use feet and inches, and then yards if referring to a more “broad” range. So you can very safely assume something is in feet and inches if its just two numbers stuck together.
I feel like i could very easily get confused with metric if i’m not running a consistent rule for default units. Seems like an easy way to get a random x10 error in there to me.
TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 06:20
collapse
As you pointed out previously, nobody uses decimeters, so x10 errors are not that common.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:33
collapse
i’m just gonna say that the joke here is that it was a 10x error. But that’s retroactive, so.
To me the difference between 200cm and 220 is literally fuck all. You ask me the difference between 4 ft and 6ft and i can pretty quickly tell you.
To you. But you are aware that this is not the case for people (almost the rest of the world) who are using metric, right?
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:35
collapse
To you. But you are aware that this is not the case for people (almost the rest of the world) who are using metric, right?
i mean i would assume so. But i have no direct reference to what 200cm is other than it’s somewhere about 6ft or 2 yards. something like 6’ 5" i think. I would need to know the height of like 50 other people to be able to make a relative distinction there.
ursakhiin@beehaw.org
on 10 Sep 2024 04:28
nextcollapse
Imagine weighing people as big rocks, though.
Until the UK changes that, us Americans and Canadians can rest assured that nothing we are doing is quite that ridiculous.
TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
on 09 Sep 2024 23:26
nextcollapse
celsius is the yelp of temperature ratings
BlackDragon@slrpnk.net
on 10 Sep 2024 01:05
nextcollapse
Sounds like a great time to propose my system of temperature: Super Celsius. I’ll connect it to the freezing and boiling points of water just like Celsius, but while freezing remains at 0, boiling is now 1000. Get ready for a nice mild day of 250.
TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
on 10 Sep 2024 01:19
nextcollapse
Kilocelsius
Brown5500@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 01:49
nextcollapse
CentiCelsius I think (10 cm in 1 m). kilo would go the other way. love this idea though
SuDmit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 10 Sep 2024 04:42
nextcollapse
I believe it’s DeciCelsius. I don’t know in what system 1 meter contains only 10 centimeters heh, thought it’s 100.
Brown5500@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Sep 2024 00:32
collapse
Haha, i knew kilo was wrong but someone would figure it out. Not sure how i confused myself that badly
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 06:33
collapse
Centi = 1e-2, deci = 1e-1
Regards,
Non-American
x0x7@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 01:50
nextcollapse
decicelsisus. It would only be 0.1kC when water is boiling. That’s not very fun.
bufalo1973@lemmy.ml
on 10 Sep 2024 15:58
nextcollapse
Milicelsius = 0.001ºC
Kilocelsius = 1000ºC
Hammocks4All@lemmy.ml
on 10 Sep 2024 18:58
collapse
I’m kilosweating
Etterra@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 02:18
nextcollapse
That’s overboard; You’re fine just multiplying your Celsius by 2.75.
No, we should go back to the ancientBabylonian base-60 system. So a chilly 30°F day would be ⟨⟨⟨°B (B for Babylonian) and a scorching 100°F is ||-°B, or ↓↓→°B if you like. There’s not really a solid way to write cuneiform on a cell phone keyboard.
Hadriscus@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 01:09
nextcollapse
You’re saying this one goes up to eleven ?
mcSibiss@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 03:28
nextcollapse
By that logic, Americans should use km/h instead of mph. Going 0-100 is much better than 0-60. For the same reason you keep telling us why Fahrenheit is so much more intuitive.
blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 03:46
nextcollapse
You can go 100 mph
driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
on 10 Sep 2024 03:53
nextcollapse
You can also go 107 Celsius, for a while.
mcSibiss@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 03:54
collapse
You guys have a lot of Max 100 zones?
Because in km/h, we got lots of those
Also you calculate acceleration using 0-100 mph?
blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 04:23
nextcollapse
I didn’t say it was legal.
jadedwench@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 05:40
nextcollapse
I think the highest speed limit I have seen in America is 85mph, which is around 135km/h. Typical highway speed limits though are 65mph, but everyone goes 5-10 over (105-120km/h).
The nice thing about mph is the whole mile a minute at 60mph. Makes it easy to mentally estimate time of arrival.
Scrollone@feddit.it
on 10 Sep 2024 06:12
nextcollapse
I mean… 100km/h is 100 km in one hour, it’s still useful to estimate a far arrival.
SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 07:32
nextcollapse
And 120 kph is 2 km per minute.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 12:01
nextcollapse
but everyone goes 5-10 over
Do police not arrest people for this?
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
on 10 Sep 2024 13:24
nextcollapse
From Texas to Ohio, municipalities are using law enforcement to counteract declining tax bases through the aggressive enforcement of fineable offenses such as speeding. A 2019 report estimated that nearly 600 jurisdictions nationwide generate at least 10% of their general fund revenue through fines and forfeitures.
Other municipalities have enacted their own policing-for-profit programs. In Brookside, Alabama, the town of about 1,200 residents saw its revenue increase more than 640% in only two years, according to AL.com, after police began an aggressive traffic stop and ticket-writing campaign. Fines and forfeitures made up almost half of the town’s budget.
d00phy@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 13:40
nextcollapse
Some places are sticklers about the speed limit, and other minor offenses. If you’re local, you tend to know where they are, either from word-of-mouth or local news. Most places won’t ticket for going 5 mph over because a lot of judges will just throw the ticket out, especially if you come with a receipt saying you had your speedometer calibrated. In seemingly more and more places, 10 mph over is the norm. Some of that’s due to shrinking police forces. Pretty much everywhere, 20+ mph over is considered reckless driving.
nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 14:41
collapse
What part of the country are you from? IME that’s far from universal. I have gotten pulled for 20+ over in multiple states and it’s often just a warning, if I do get ticketed it’s just a ticket and that’s the end of it:
When I had first gotten my license in CA I got pulled over while doing 105-110 in a 65 mph zone. The cop wrote it up for 99 mph, which was a simple speeding ticket without the option for traffic school. I went to court and the judge knocked it down to a <$200 ticket with traffic school so I didn’t get any points on my record.
85 mph in a 65 is normal in a ton of states, they’d be they’d be writing up people for reckless driving in every other traffic stop if 20 over were the threshold.
Just because they don’t ticket you for it, doesn’t mean it isn’t legally considered reckless. Cops often exercise a bit of discretion when deciding which ticket, if any, to write up. Some people just get out of tickets. I’ve never been that lucky, and I’ve never really driven particularly fast. A quick search suggests reckless is considered 15-over in CA, but I can’t find the specific statute.
To answer your question, I’ve lived all up and down the east coast and TX.
nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
on 11 Sep 2024 06:47
collapse
The only threshold that will automatically get you a reckless driving violation in CA is over 100 mph
Texas has no defined speed threshold
Alabama, where I lived previously on the east coast, has no defined threshold
The guideline for officers in CO is to consider a reckless driving ticket at 26 over the limit and above
I could keep searching individual states but I guess my point is there are many states where 20 over is pretty much a common thing among drivers and not typically punishable with a reckless driving charge. I haven’t spent much time in the northeast, perhaps things are different there.
nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 14:45
nextcollapse
Lol no, you have to be going something like double the speed limit most places to get arrested
You might get a ticket, but almost any judge will throw the ticket out if they write you up for going 5-10 over. Some places will write the ticket anyways in the hopes of making some extra revenue, but generally speaking it’s not a ticket that is worth writing because it’s so easy to get tossed out.
Arrest no, ticket maybe.
Depends on lots of things, like the road and expected speed, is it a neighborhood, school, or empty highway. how the officer is feeling. surrounding traffic speed.
Also I think the ticket doubles or goes up in price 10+ mph over the limit.
toddestan@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 04:00
nextcollapse
Actually, it’s the other way around. 100 degrees F weather is really hot. Driving 100 MPH is really fast.
In metric we have 40 degrees C weather is really hot, and driving…uhhh… (gets out a calculator)… 160 km/h is really fast.
Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
on 10 Sep 2024 04:39
nextcollapse
Uhh and 100 ° C is also really hot.
photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:08
collapse
Plus, 100 km/h is also pretty fast.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
on 10 Sep 2024 07:58
collapse
100°C is where you shouldn’t touch it anymore and 100 to 120 km/h is the speed limit about everywhere except germany.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:03
collapse
100mph is like, actually kinda spooky though. 100 kmh isn’t spooky. Also 60mph ties nicely into the seconds/minutes/hours time dichotomy, which is fun.
mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 03:38
nextcollapse
TWO HUNDRED AND SEVETY THREE KELVIN I’M FREEZING
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 03:56
nextcollapse
this is so true, but the thing the celsiouds won’t understand, that the farenheitoids haven’t realized, is that the celsius users die (not literally) in heat of about 85 f which for any fahrenheit user is, literally a nice summer day.
EDIT: i’m making a joke about the UK heat waves, since people don’t seem to realize that.
It has LAYERS!
Switchy85@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 04:38
nextcollapse
Humidity plays a big part of that I think. Like, don’t older folks start dropping in England around 85-90f because of the humidity there? In Phoenix 107 sucks hard, but it’s dry so you can still effectively cool off.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:30
collapse
the humidity certainly doesn’t help, but believe it or not, it gets humid here in the US too. We get high humidity 85f days out here, if you’re doing yard work, whatever clothing you’re wearing is literally going to be soaked in sweat, it’s not funny.
The bigger problem in some cases, is that european houses are designed differently to american houses, so the houses tended to be unbearably warm unless they had AC. Though a lot of people were still losing it with how hot 85f was outside.
Dry heat is “nicer” only in the sense that at the same temperature, you sweat less. That’s it, 100f compared to 80f and humid, both are equally shit, one is just going to drench you in sweat and make you feel disgusting, while the other is going to exhaust you, drench you in sweat, and leave you feeling dry. With wet sticky clothing.
weker01@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 09:07
nextcollapse
People in Egypt, Turkey, India, Philippine, etc, etc, etc die in 29.5°C heat? That’s news to me.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:24
collapse
the joke here is people in the UK experiencing a heat wave. Guess i didn’t make that clear enough.
People in countries with much much hotter climates than the US use celsius, because most of the rest of the world uses celsius.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:26
collapse
the US also has hot climates though? Have you looked the coverage of latitude that the US has? We have everything from directly on the equator, to about as near the north pole as you can get.
AndreTelevise@beehaw.org
on 10 Sep 2024 04:07
nextcollapse
Freezing water at 0 and boiling water as 100 simplifies things a lot but also doesn’t make sense when it comes to things like weather, like, what am I supposed to wear outside when it’s 23 degrees?
photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:22
nextcollapse
The same thing you wear when its 75 F? Idk man, they’re just numbers. You can project whatever you want onto them.
AndreTelevise@beehaw.org
on 10 Sep 2024 06:13
collapse
Well, in that you’re right.
PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 05:36
nextcollapse
30 is hot, 20 is nice, 10 is chilly, and 0 is ice
Picked it up from a guy who teaches Latin on YouTube of all places
SoGrumpy@lemmy.ml
on 10 Sep 2024 05:52
nextcollapse
what am I supposed to wear outside when it’s 23 degrees?
Shorts, T-shirt and flip-flops, or
Short sleeve shirt (Hawaii style), linen trousers, moccasins.
Something along those lines would be good at 23^o^ C.
twig@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 14:08
nextcollapse
As a lifelong celcius user I have a very intuitive sense of how 23 degrees celcius feels. I have no intuitive sense of how 50 degrees Fahrenheit feels.
If you’re used to a system then it’s intuitive.
AndreTelevise@beehaw.org
on 12 Sep 2024 06:42
collapse
0°C means that weather starts to be icy and you need to be careful when driving.
20°C is mild warm. 30°C is hot. 100°C is sauna.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 04:45
nextcollapse
would someone explain to me why whenever european people are confronted with the idea of the imperial system their brain seems to shutdown into a slow state of oxygen preservation? I genuinely don’t understand it.
“40c in f is 104???” yeah, round it, its 100f, you think we specify to the Nth degree here?
“86f doesn’t really make sense” yeah, round it. 90 is pretty close, and who boy 90s are pretty hot.
“why isn’t 50f the perfect temperature” you’re literally just applying an arbitrary point on something entirely arbitrary. But ok. (also it is the perfect temperature range between 50-70f)
“how is -17c and 37c cold and hot???” literally round it bro, -20 and 40c are right there wow look at that now it makes more sense! Im pretty sure this commenter is aussie or something, so in their defense, anything under 70f is cold for them. Either that or they don’t wear clothes, ever, because they’re calculating the coldness with no clothing. for some reason.
“yeah but we also think of things in relation to the temperature of water, like freezing is when shit is icy, and also the relation to the boiling point” brother, water boils in fahrenheit as well (212f, but again, you’re going to shocked by this one, you can round it down to 200f, wow look at that, it’s like, pretty close.) sure the freezing point is still higher, but you really only get freezes here at super prolonged periods of just under 30f weather, or really cold snaps that stick around a bit. generally snow in 30f weather is, not really a thing, the ground is still warm enough it melts. ice doesn’t form unless it’s like, close to 0.
guys, i promise, it’s not this hard. Just, think about it a little bit, please. You’re killing me here!
Gladaed@feddit.org
on 10 Sep 2024 04:59
nextcollapse
Tl;dr: just round. This goes both ways.
Converting a 1 significant digit number must not increase the number of significant digits.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 05:22
nextcollapse
literally this, just round.
This is what i do every time i have to think about celsius, i have rough equivalency ranges which often get my estimations into celsius within 1 or 2 degrees of the actual answer. All i need to know is a few rough datapoints and i can get a really usable output.
The thing is that you need to learn celsius if you are doing science, but celsius users don’t really need to learn fahrenheit, so this isn’t really a problem that comes up for a lot of celsius users.
This is horrible logic. If anything, it should be: you need to learn Celsius if you are doing science, but most people aren’t scientists and therefore don’t need to learn Celsius, so this isn’t really a problem that comes up for a lot of Fahrenheit users.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:28
collapse
maybe in high school science, but like you said, after that fact you really don’t touch it ever again, so it becomes a relatively dead concept in most peoples brain
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:28
collapse
yeah, and it’s like not that hard. If you talk to people that use fahrenheit on the regular, you should learn how to convert to fahrenheit right off the dome, just as they should learn to convert between celsius to fahrenheit as well.
Literally anything else is unreasonable lol.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 06:41
collapse
Idk why you guys are so passionate about this whole rounding thing? Rounding off 107 to 100 doesn’t change the information, only the precision. It’s not easier to interpret 200 than 212 or anything?
If you want quick conversion, just
F ≈ 2 * C + 30
Remavas@programming.dev
on 10 Sep 2024 06:49
nextcollapse
I like how this directly goes against the argument of Fahrenheit being more “graded” with integers lol
If you fail to provide uncertainty it suggest that Celsius is much more complicated because you need to pay attention to decimal points.
If you write 200 it would be anything between ±50and ±1 if you say 212 it means ± 2/1
jadedwench@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 05:51
nextcollapse
I assure you, you get icy roads and snow at 28-30f. Upstate NY gets tons of snow and most of that is above 25f. I don’t see it get in the teens too much. Single digits or colder is pretty rare. All depends on the region up here. Due to the lakes, it is all over the place.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 19:43
collapse
it depends on where you are, obviously, but out here we generally don’t get snow into about the 20-25f range, and we rarely get snow that sticks around 30f, it does snow then, but it all melts. as i previously said.
smooth_tea@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 08:24
nextcollapse
You’re missing the point. The issue with Fahrenheit is not about the conversion from Celsius, most Europeans don’t need to do that anyway. The problem is Fahrenheit in itself, it’s just not elegant or scientific and therefore comes off as arbitrary and only makes sense when you grow up with it.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 19:28
collapse
yeah but why does that matter? It’s all relative, the only good thing about celsius is that it happens to line up nicely with one specific elements boiling point. If you’re doing science the only redeeming quality is that it maps linearly to kelvin, which is nice.
some of the relative math is nice, for certain units. But outside of that, for like, temperature, and cooking where none of that matters?
fossilesque@mander.xyz
on 10 Sep 2024 09:36
nextcollapse
There’s a reason why drug dealers and those who have huffed too much under the fume hood still know metric like the back of their hand.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:50
collapse
idk if they know it like the back of their hand. But to be fair, anybody with the collective ability of about half a brain cell can use the metric system, so that’s not really saying much.
LunarLoony@lemmy.sdf.org
on 10 Sep 2024 19:19
collapse
…What?
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 10 Sep 2024 19:40
collapse
you and me both
dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 05:38
nextcollapse
In Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, the number of thieves wasn’t really necessarily 40. The number was likely just chosen because 40 was an exaggerated number, much like when we’d say “I’ve told you a hundred million times”. So 40 as a shorthand for “a huge amount” seems fitting in celcius.
cosmin@programming.dev
on 10 Sep 2024 06:22
nextcollapse
Ohhhhhh… you just cleared up something I believed for 20 years
hakunawazo@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 07:35
collapse
This fairy tale is collected in a frame story in One Thousand and One Nights. Maybe the number of nights were also exaggerated…
tino@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 07:12
nextcollapse
it’s not about what makes more sense: what makes more sense is what you use everyday and is natural to you. 40+ C is freaking hot because when you experience it, it’s freaking hot.
It’s about what the entire rest of the world is using as a standard.
CaptKoala@lemmy.ml
on 10 Sep 2024 07:27
nextcollapse
Metric system is best system, no exceptions.
Anything over 40°C is fuckin’ hot, anything under 4°C is fuckin’ cold.
tetris11@lemmy.ml
on 10 Sep 2024 09:16
nextcollapse
Anything over 31°C on a humid day is torture. As someone without AC, being indoors is the worst. What do you? Play games? Your devices heat up too.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 09:22
nextcollapse
Are ACs not viable for you? I don’t know I could do without one, sounds scary.
Where i live it can go up to 53°C in the summer.
In summer when there is a streak of very hot days and there’s like a 41°C day, you will hear people out saying " oh, today it’s quite cool, that’s nice!"
Might be a location thing, where I live temperatures over 30 are the norm (humid too, shit sucks). 40 days are rare but not unheard of either. Meanwhile, my only experience with anything lower than 15 is the fridge.
Also isn’t 101 also really really hot? Or what about 99? And how about 1, isn’t that also really really cold? It is an arbitrary frame of reference you have set up in an attempt to make a non-intuitive system more easily accesible.
meliaesc@lemmynsfw.com
on 10 Sep 2024 12:42
nextcollapse
I’m not understanding your counterpoint… it’s a scale no matter which system you use?
Lol it is the same reason why you all argue for metric though? Celsius is random numbers nonsense. Fahrenheit is a scale that makes sense. 0 freeze, 100 boil. Don’t you metric heads love that shit or you just lying the whole time?
It’s no just Wuropeans, but the majority of the world
Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 13:13
nextcollapse
Forty-one sounds insanely hot as an outside temperature if that’s the standard you’re used to. And that’s the thing that the Fahrentards refuse to wrap their head around.
stingpie@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 17:25
collapse
Fahernhaters are always like, “nooo!! 40 degrees is so hot!!” Meanwhile, the fahrenchad’s resting body temperature is nearly 2.5 times hotter. All fahernhaters would die at that temperature.
crozilla@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 14:21
nextcollapse
Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 15:37
collapse
Nice vid. He isn’t wrong. Though maybe we could come up with a compromise temperature scale for everyone to use. Even 100 F isn’t as uncommon as it used to be. But I would love to have more granularity without decimals.
hex@programming.dev
on 10 Sep 2024 14:47
nextcollapse
Once again… the classic argument of:
“Well, I grew up using this system, and I’m used to the system. I have built an internal intuition for how hot and cold the temperature is. I am used to >100 being hot! 40 is not hot!”
Well then. I grew up using celcius and… “IT’S FOURTY FUCKING ONE DEGREES OUTSIDE?” sounds just as hot.
Femcowboy@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 15:02
nextcollapse
No… I get it… 41 < 105… I totally agree haha funny joke. I’m just over this debate. Who gives a fuck what temperature scale you use? Just use the one you know. We have conversions for that reason.
SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
on 10 Sep 2024 22:00
collapse
No, that’s not it, we’re measuring in incredulity units, which are syllables.
“One hun-dred and se-ven?!” == 6 syllables
“For-ty one?!” == 3 syllables
Also, the first one has more vowel sounds to really draw out to indicate higher levels of I-can’t-even. It sounds only golly-jeepers in Celsius, and much more I’m-so-done-with-this-shit in Fahrenheit.
Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 15:28
nextcollapse
Yeah, but you can’t argue that adding a whole digit doesn’t make it seem bigger. And take a kid who doesn’t yet know either system. They for sure will think 107 is hotter then 41.
That said, I wish everywhere that gave a temp in the US would give both so I could get a better sense of Celsius. Most apps and such let you choose one or the other, but not both.
Raiderkev@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 15:42
nextcollapse
I read that as “take that from a kid who doesn’t know either system,” and I was about to say are you living under a rock or something?
Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
on 11 Sep 2024 04:56
collapse
On the other hand it dilutes the effect of lower values because a lot of them are double digit. 20F, 40F, 60F… all double digit, but wildly varying. On the other hand, with Celsius you get:
Below 0: There’s ice/snow.
0: Things are freezing/thawing (depending on what the temperature was before.
10s (Spring): T-shirt weather.
10s (Fall): Sweater weather.
20s: Nice in the sun.
30s: Nice in the shade.
40s: THIS IS PUNISHMENT FOR OUR HUBRIS.
Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
on 11 Sep 2024 04:55
collapse
I do like 0 as freezing. We should have a new one where 0 is 0C, and 100 is 100F. Or maybe 1000 is 100F so I can get my extra resolution without decimals
bignate31@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 19:03
collapse
Yeah, I grew up in Fahren-wasteland, but have lived in Celsi-heaven for 7 years. I embraced it, and now when someone says “40 FUCKING DEGREES!!” I know exactly what they’re talking about. It’s hot. You probably don’t have an air con. It’s misery.
meep_launcher@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 16:19
nextcollapse
I present the temperature scale that I made up- the Human Scale (H°)
I thought about the Fahrenheit vs Celsius debate, and I think both have practical uses, however I think combined they could make a very practical scale.
Fahrenheit: while my American sensibilities agree that 100° is a good marker for what % of my patience is used up to cut a bitch, I think a similar place would be the average human body temperature. For this reason, 100°H = 98.6°F . It’s not a perfect match, but it can still give us the satisfaction of “IT’S 100°!?” while having practical implications for medical uses “your body temperature is 102°, 2° warmer than average”.
Celsius: I think this scale makes a ton of sense for colder temperatures. When the thermometer reads 0°, that’s when you can expect snow. For this reason, 0°H = 0°C.
The conversation rates are:
H = (F-32) × 1.5
H= C × 2.7
More precise is
H = (F-32) × 1.501501501…
H = C × 2.7027027027…
While using the freezing point of water and the average human body temperature seem like inconsistent and arbitrary benchmarks, my goal is less about consistency and more about practicality for everyday use.
Now watch this scale grow as big as Esperanto.
MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
on 10 Sep 2024 16:41
nextcollapse
This… Is actually a pretty good idea.
There’s a few meme images around that Celsius is how water “feels” and Fahrenheit is how people feel (and Kelvin is how atoms feel), which isn’t entirely off base…
But frankly, I would support human scale more than Fahrenheit. I live in a country with Celsius, and my only real gripe with it is that whole degrees are not very precise. You have to go to half-degrees, or even 1/10th of a degree to get reasonable precision on temperature.
Just seems like the human scale would work well for 90% of use cases, aside from science where we should be using either Celsius or Kelvin.
the problem is that the average body temperature is slowly decreasing, so this isn’t that well defined, we would need to link it to an event that is at constant temperature
also the celsius scale isn’t that good imo because it’s about the freezing and boiling of water at ambient pressure so it isn’t universal
I say we set the boltzmann constant to a known value, and define temperatures from there
after that we find a range of temperature with useful round values and offset the scale for everyday use
meep_launcher@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 17:33
collapse
So I had to look up the Boltzmann constant and… That’s a lot of math.
I think you have a point on the decreasing human temperature. It looks like the decrease is at 0.05°F every decade, which actually is quite a bit. If it was something like 0.005°F, I’d say that that’s a problem for the people of the year 2500 to solve.
That said, the reason it’s been decreasing seems to be due to medical advances and not some change in the Earth’s gravity or climate change. I would be surprised to see humans in the year 2500 having an average body temperature of 72.9°F, or closing in on 0°F in the year 3,984. I imagine there will be fluctuations, but there’s got to be a lower limit to what is physically possible.
I’d still defend the Celsius number, since even though there are changes due to air pressure, it’s changing over space and not time. In the year 2500, water at sea level will still freeze at 0°C.
I think my big thing is I’m less concerned about a logically consistent scale, and more towards a scale that’s geared to the emotional side of temperature.
Thinking outloud moment
If we are going for the emotional side of temperature specifically, we would also need to factor in wind, humidity, sunlight, what season it is, etc. and that’s a lot of variables, and even then that’s how you get the wind-chill factor. But even that is almost completely subjective. I feel like that scale would go from “IT’S GOTTA BE NEGATIVE A MILLION FUCKIN’ DEGREES” to “I FEEL LIKE IM ON THE SURFACE OF THE SUN, so like a bazillion degrees” and then we go to the traffic report.
Either way, it’s not a perfect scale, but I’d still take that over the other two.
xenoclast@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 18:50
nextcollapse
This is great! It’s gonna be as big as The Swatch .beat!
CodexArcanum@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 19:16
collapse
I believe the Fahrenheit scale was originally set up for 100° to be human body temperature. We’re just built colder now I guess? I had to look up what zero was and apparently he originally set it at the coldest the air had ever been around his village, but later had to standardize it and so cooked up some brine that froze at 0°.
I would propose that 100 should be calibrated around the wet bulb temperature, which I think is around 105°F but varies with humidity. That’s the temperature where sweating doesn’t cool you off any more, so any temperature 100 or more is deadly to most people. I like 0 being freezing for water, seems sensible and is also a good “prolonged exposure to this or lower will kill you” cutoff point.
CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de
on 10 Sep 2024 20:59
nextcollapse
I heard it was supposed to be human body temperature, but they used horse body temperature instead because it was close to human body temperature but more… stable.
meep_launcher@lemm.ee
on 10 Sep 2024 21:42
collapse
the wet bulb temperature^1^ is just the temperature of a wet thermometer, and varies with humidity and temperature. Wet bulb temp is never higher than the dry bulb temp, so (entertainingly) you’re proposing that the meaning of 100° varies wildly and is always lower than the true temperature, effectively making the air temperature always ≥100°, and increases when the air is drier, like some sort of inverse relative humidity.
^1^(I’m aware you probably didn’t mean wet bulb temperature here, but let’s have fun with the idea) :)
xx3rawr@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 2024 16:54
nextcollapse
41° is “mild” to me as a Celsius user only because my country is too fucking hot in the first place.
averyminya@beehaw.org
on 10 Sep 2024 17:45
nextcollapse
That’s just regional though. Not much humidity in a lot of California. Not much humidity in Oregon, though there can be some. Fair amount of humidity in Wisconsin. Lots of humidity in Florida.
But one universal truth between all 4 of those states, despite the humidity, is when it’s 107 fucking degrees!?
Facebones@reddthat.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:43
collapse
I hate “but its a dry heat” people. At 95, maybe. At 107, fuck you 107 is 107.
While I agree 107 is 107 and it sucks regardless, at like 30% humidity my sweat can evaporated and do it’s job of keeping me cooler, at 98% humidity your sweat has a much much harder time evaporating and it actively feels hotter. The time I spent living in Florida taught me that yes dry heat is absolutely better.
Facebones@reddthat.com
on 10 Sep 2024 19:47
collapse
I’m perfectly aware scientifically its better, but as somebody who doesn’t live in 107 degree territory - 107 can fuck off any way you slice it. 🤣
Facebones@reddthat.com
on 10 Sep 2024 18:44
nextcollapse
I hate that I agree with this lol
Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 10 Sep 2024 21:15
nextcollapse
That’s why I only use Kelvin. 314.15 sounds like 3 times more “WTF HOW HOT IS TODAY??!?” than your paltry 107
LordWiggle@lemmy.world
on 10 Sep 2024 21:41
nextcollapse
YOU’RE BOILING?!?
Oh, you’re just an inbecile who likes to prove the movie Idiocracy is actually a documentary.
KingOfTheCouch@lemmy.ca
on 10 Sep 2024 21:45
nextcollapse
Fuck it. I’m inventing a new scale.
Behold! “Disagree Degrees”. We’re going to combine the best traits of the other units. No more searching for the stupid little degree character in the character map. D for degrees or disagrees - whatever, I don’t give a shit.
0D = 0K (Like Kelvin, no negatives! That’s so dumb!)
0.4D = -40 C and -40 F
1D = Water Freezing point (Need a consistent point of scale)
10D = “Pleasant temperature”
100D = Kind of hot
500D = Really hot for people (>40C or >100F) “It’s like 500 disagrees out there!”
1000D= Water boiling (To match the freezing temp)
1,000,000,000,000D = Surface of the sun
Good luck on the math converting to other units, this temperature scale isn’t about being useful for nerd stuff, it’s all about appealing to our emotions.
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
on 11 Sep 2024 07:47
collapse
“Bigger number is more better” also explains American sports where you get 3 points for running a bit and then play stops for an ad break and the national anthem.
TheHarpyEagle@pawb.social
on 11 Sep 2024 19:46
collapse
I mean… assuming you’re talking about American football, there’s at least one scoring move that awards one point, so it makes sense for more difficult scoring moves to give more points. The harder the action is to complete, the more points you get for doing it.
threaded - newest
The only good thing about Fahrenheit is that 69 degrees (20.5 C) is a nice temperature.
a 69°C cup coffee on winter is nice
A cup of lukewarm coffee please.
Edit: my wrong, I thought it was 69°F !
All my excuses
According to James Hoffmann, the ideal temperature to enjoy coffee is between 50°C and 60°C, he may know a thing or two about coffee, and you may think the coffee you drink is hotter that it really is.
And you can bake things at 420
You could bake something at 420 Celsius too, assuming your okay with charcoal as the end product
Or Pizza!
you can also bake things at 420C if you’re not a coward about this (like proper thin pizza) (maybe it’s a bit too high but you get the idea)
Well… If it’s only for a few seconds…
ok you actually convinced me, Fahrenheit is better (except I can’t spell it properly without autocorrect)
This is genuinely the most inconvenient thing about Fahrenheit
You can make the temperature dial of an oven have matching degrees of rotation and degrees Celcius.
Turn the dial to point straight down to bake at 180°
Turn it 3/4 of the way to cook a pizza at 270°
Also it’s a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside, and it requires no prior understanding to use it as such.
The freezing point of water is very important to weather, and requires prior knowledge of the arbitrary number 32.
Okay so fahrenheit has a well-defined high and low, but an arbitrary freezing point of one certain chemical. All other chemical freezing points are arbitrary.
Celsius has an arbitrary high and low, but a well-defined freezing point of that same chemical. All other freezing points are arbitrary.
If your motivation is to minimize the amount of arbitrary values you have to memorize, fahrenheit is the clear winner.
The 0 in Fahrenheit was based on nothing and the 100F was supposed to be human temperature but it is off by some degrees
The water is not an arbitrary temperature, the weather is water dependant, at 0C the water will freeze and you get snow/ice instead of rain
0°F is when the ocean freezes
100° F was human body temperature, later revised somewhat with better measurements and a decrease of parasites . The average person in those days in London had a slightly higher body temperature than today
0F is not ocean freezing, is the freezing temp of a brine mix that he chose arbitrarily (some think that he chose that temp because it was close to the coldest his town had ever been and he used it to calibrate the scales of his thermometers)
FYI, the ocean freezes at around 28F
Oceans freezing also depends on currents, and mixing of the water from the surface. 28° will freeze water in a room.
This is why often the ocean is not frozen at much lower temperatures.
I’m not at all cognizant of how 0 was decided
The zero C is freezing and 100 C is boiling, so not really arbitrary.
But it’s pretty hard to define a scale that has intuitive, round numbers for everything we might care about.
You’re correct. In a lab setting, 0C and 100C are not arbitrary.
In the weather forecast, they are.
Which ties into your final point, it’s hard to define a scale that is best for everything, which is exactly what I’ve been saying this whole time. Fahrenheit is better for some things, Celsius for others.
The only reason people in this thread are saying otherwise is because for some reason they’ve tied up some significant part of their self-worth into their belief that “lmao DAE fahrenheit bad amirite??1?”, and they mistakenly believe that those of us that understand nuance are trying to belittle or disparage them in some way. I assure you, we are not.
well i mean technically, the only reason they aren’t arbitrary is because the mean something, the numbers arent significant, it’s what they represent, which is the boiling/freezing point of water.
i’m seeing people put very little thought into the things they’re saying, i just recently posted a comment covering a few of those things in this thread. For some reason europeans seem to just get absolutely brainfucked when presented with the concept of a unit system that isn’t metric, it’s like your literal entire lives are built upon the concept of 0 10 100 scaling, and you can’t consider literally anything outside of it.
Now maybe i’m being a little hyperbolic here, but US peeps pretty well understand that we could just “be using celsius” that’s not really a wacky concept or idea here. Celsius peeps really seem to think that if they had to use fahrenheit, they would probably die from accidental over-consumption of water, somehow. And in their defense, a lot of our shit is kinda fucking weird. But again, it’s really not that bad.
at least, this has been my experience from the various threads i’ve been in on this topic over time.
It’s not like the weather depends on the boiling point of formaldehyde…
Is it? Only pure water will actually freeze at 0c. Rain, puddles, lakes, etc aren’t all that pure… And we’re talking about ambient air temps here. The air can be below freezing and it can still rain. And you can get snow/hail above freezing…
Knowing the freezing point is just one factor. Knowing it’s generally around 30F is pretty much always close enough (not that remembering 32 is actually very difficult)
Edit: also water only freezes at 0c if it’s at sea level… I really don’t think 0°=freezing is the huge advantage that celcius stans think it is.
yeah, and let me know how accurate our weather models and prediction systems are. Can you calculate accurately how much the temperature in a specific part of the atmosphere will drop to a large updraft?
What’s that? This is literally an entire career field of study and development? Oh that’s weird.
Also the only real time this is relevant, is when things that have this weird property called thermal mass get below freezing, it’s snowing in 30f weather? That’s not sticking, the ground is too warm. or the sun will literally just melt it even if it is cold enough. Water? You mean that weird thing called like, a lake or river? Those get below freezing, without actively freezing, lakes won’t even drop that much in terms of temperature, aside from the surface level. The surface may freeze, but even that is pretty variable.
Also yes, it’s the arbitrary number of 32, so is literally every number though. We have 2 numbers to remember, you also have 2 numbers to remember, god forbid you have like, a password, or a passcode, or like, a numbers based lock somewhere. Humans have never been known to be good at memorizing short strings of data.
like idk how to tell you this, but, it’s not that big of a deal?
If that was true outsiders should be able to use Fahrenheit without much explanation. I’ve never got a clue what the °F values mean, I always have to use a converter. It’s really not as intuitive as people who grew up with it seem to believe.
because it’s all relative, and you need to actually know how the temperatures relate to the things you’re experiencing? I’m going to hazard a guess and say you’re comfortable with using celsius? Oops cognitive bias. You would have to test this on someone who doesn’t understand temperature yet. It just so happens that here in the US, it pretty conveniently lines up with those figures for us.
If your example cannot be proven on any existing person I’d argue it’s hardly relevant to our reality.
°F most definitely isn’t intuitive enough for people who aren’t accustomed to it to use. If it is more intuitive at all, it’s not to any meaningful degree.
possibly? Arguably you could still make the case that the existing range of 0-100f is more pleasant, and arguably nicer to use. But you would have to either find someone uniquely adapted to both systems, or you would have to do a lot of independent study on how humans interact with numbers and ranges of numbers. In order to find a specific answer it’s going to be quite hard.
intuition is bullshit anyway, it’s highly predicated on previous experience and an existing knowledge base, so i feel like that’s kind of arguing “well a race car driver drives good, so why don’t normal drivers drive good” kind of territory if you arent careful.
Yeah, which is why most people here in favor of Celcius argue that Fahrenheit isn’t, in fact, more intuitive and therefore more suited to describe the weather. Both are arbitrary, both can be learned and used very easily, the only difference is what you’re used to.
yeah, but i think arguing that celsius is “more intuitive” when the one primary advantage outside of science is that it lines up with water relatively nicely compared to fahrenheit, is like, ok.
32f and 212f and 0c and 100c aren’t really all that substantially different as far as the general use case goes.
Nobody is arguing that though.
hmm.
“Fahrenheit isn’t more intuitive” doesn’t not mean “Celcius is more intuitive”. You’re mistaken if you think that’s what’s being argued here.
Neither one is intuitive. Intuition isn’t a useful metric here anyway. After all we could ask: Which one is more intuitive - kilometers or miles? Kilograms or pounds? Do we have to change how me measure time (base 12) to a base 10 as well, would that be more intuitive?
Answer is no. All those units have to be learned and filled with experience anyway. Nobody can interpret temperature scales intuitively, neither Fahrenheit nor Celsius.
Fahrenheit simply has no advantage over Celcius. And it doesn’t have to. Some people are used to it, so keep using it by all means. Don’t argue that it’s superior and we’re all good.
i mean, fundamentally that’s what that statement would have to mean, unless you’re referring to a rock being more intuitive or something.
Why would you mention that fahrenheit isn’t as intuitive as celsius, if celsius wasn’t objectively more intuitive? Also why did you use a triple negative?
ultimately yeah, neither system is more intuitive than the other. Celsius has a nice use case in science and research, but that’s about it. fahrenheit isn’t really used anywhere outside of weather, and cooking, where it also doesn’t really matter, and no cooking is not “water based chemistry” as someone tried to propose.
also technically time isn’t really in base 12. one year is 12 months, is 31-30 days, is 24 hours, is 60 minutes, is 60 seconds, is then broken into tenths, hundreths, and thousandths of a second from there, etc… It’s not quite one specific system, just a hodgepodge of multiple different structures.
exactly! I’m not arguing that fahrenheit is better, i’m just trying to get europeans to think it isn’t the single most useless system in the world because they spent 12 seconds thinking about things and got confused when they didn’t spend and more time on it.
I think a lot of people in this thread are just being objectively stupid, and not quite realizing it, and thus saying silly things that don’t make any sense. Europeans seem to do this a lot whenever the US customary unit system comes up in discussion, and i don’t understand why.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
hey man, i didn’t make the claim. i’m just came here to complain about celsius users not thinking about things. If you can find an example of me saying fahrenheit is more intuitive, i’ll have to eat my words.
Originally you replied to me, replying to someone else claiming fahrenheit was “a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” and required “no prior understanding to use it as such”. This was never about Celsius being intuitive or not, it was about Fahrenheit. If you didn’t disagree with me there, your replies to me were pointless. Since then you seem to be arguing against a straw man.
I never claimed Celcius to be intuitive, in fact I claimed the opposite - neither scale is intuitive. Therefore Fahrenheit and Celcius are equally useful in measuring the weather and the idea of Fahrenheit being especially suitable is incorrect, based on the confirmation bias of those who are already used to it. That’s the only argument I’m making here.
and this is generally the case. I’m sure if you were to sample the opinion of people randomly, this is roughly what you would get back. I may have said that it was an intuitive feature of fahrenheit, and it is, and so is the 0-100 scale of water freezing/boiling in celsius, but that’s irrelevant aside from the fact that it’s intuitive, and that point of contextual relevance you might as well mention that plants are green, and that the sky is blue.
possibly, but i’m mostly complaining about the collective response here, not the particular responses in this thread in particular. Which is also quite long so i don’t even really recall what has been said here to be specifically accurate.
Only if you asked people accustomed to Fahrenheit. People who aren’t used to it cannot use it without prior understanding at all. To think otherwise just proves your confirmation bias again.
Then what should “intuitive” even mean if not “intuitive to use”? Because it certainly isn’t that.
ok, so you genuinely think, that people who use celsius cannot experience the sensation of “hot” and “cold” without a number referencing the temperature directly in front of them? Specifically that of the celsius system?
I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it’s irrelevant and doesn’t matter. If you were to put someone into a room at either 0 or 100 degrees fahrenheit (without telling them the temperature of the room), from a climate relatively similar to the US, they would either say “it’s really cold” or “it’s really hot” even if they’re not directly from a similar climate, it would still be relatively inline with these expectations.
this is what we mean when we say “really hot” and “really cold” the human body has an innate response to the temperatures that it experiences. Classifying it accurately is hard. But in this case it doesn’t need to be, it’s a heuristic.
think of a hammer, an intuitive feature of a hammer is pretty obvious, there is only one realistic way to use it. You can’t grab it by the hand and do much with it. The head itself is shaped and specifically designed for a certain type of use case, and the handle is pretty clearly built for holding onto.
going further, an intuitive feature of a rock is the ability to move/throw it. There are certain thing that are so fundamental to the human experience, there isn’t much in the way of conceptualization there.
intuition is simply the ability to naturally reason without external influence. For example, being able to place your foot where it needs to be so you don’t fall down a cliff. And intuitive system would be one that is innately familiar to the user, which obviously nothing is. But systems can have intuitive features or design elements however.
No and that’s not what I claimed. What I’m saying is that if you tell someone accustomed to Celcius “it’s 42F° outside, oh by the way fahrenheit goes from 0=really cold to 100=really hot”, they have no idea about the actual weather. The points of 0 and 100 Fahrenheit are way to arbitrary to be understood without having experienced them.
“Really cold” and “really hot” are completely subjective. They depend on the climate you’re used to and come down to personal preference even. Your “really cold” might be my “pleasantly chilly”. And even if I knew what 0F° and 100F° were in C° I’d have no idea how that relates to the (probably much more common) values between them. Percentages of subjective temperature tell me nothing. 20F° would basically have to be 20% warmer than “really cold”, right? Intuitively I would have guessed somewhere around 7°C (nice autumn morning), turns out 20F° is still way below the freezing point. The idea of 0F° and 100F° does not, in fact, help me interpret these values “with no prior understanding”.
It’s simply not an intuitive frame of reference - except if you have at one point learned what the numbers mean. And at this point it’s exactly as useful als Celcius.
obviously, but nobody was saying that, so i’m not sure why it’s relevant.
This is like explaining what a door is to someone, only for them to remove the door and go “well now what’s it supposed to do?”
not strictly? 0f is cold enough to require wearing additional layers if you don’t want to freeze and die after a long enough period of time. 100f, while more livable, is still rather hot. Hot enough that you can’t really do hard labor in that weather. Even people who live in climates that are really hot know this, and there’s a reason they often wear really specific clothing, or end up having darker skin. Although that’s evolutionary advantage at that point.
Unless you took someone living in finland, and someone living in australia. Although deserts aren’t really a fair comparison here either. They can get quite cold as well. They’re obviously going to have a bit of a different reaction, but i doubt it’s going to be significant enough to break the scale. It’s probably going to shift one way or the other a little bit, but that’s to be expected.
again, you’re applying celsius logic to a fahrenheit problem, and then being surprised when it doesn’t work. You don’t know what 0f is, not because fahrenheit is stupid and bad, but because you don’t use it. So you’re trying to estimate into a system you don’t know, and then you’re complaining about my generalization when it’s your translation that doesn’t work. It’s clearly evident because you even say “20f is way below freezing” which is not at all true here in the fahrenheit lands. 20f is just below freezing here. well below freezing happens when you crack around 10-15f. Way below freezing is quite literally, about 0f.
no it doesn’t and thats because you have an anti thetical world view that you’re trying to apply to it. This breaks the application of the heuristic very evidently.
sure, but my point is still that the 0f-100f is a broadly applicable heuristic that should roughly hold true. i believe if you convert these numbers into celsius, which is how you would correctly apply this heuristic, you would see something roughly equivalent to -20c and 40c, which to me seems to line up with how celsius peeps seem to experience temperature.
You’re missing the point here entirely.
Is Fahrenheit intuitive? No, proven by the fact that it can’t be used without prior understanding, as shown in my example.
The rest is sealioning.
no, and neither is any other numbering system, it’s all arbitrary we already determined this.
as you try and apply celsius logic to the fahrenheit system in order to understand fahrenheit, incorrectly… While still ignoring my prime example here.
Exactly. Fahrenheit is just metric weather.
By that metric, kelvin would be even better though.
You miss out on screaming that it’s negative anything though.
-40F = -40C
Kelvin doesn’t have a negative.
The best system would have 0 at a mild, comfortable temperature, and go up or down by 100 degrees per one degrees Fahrenheit.
But mild and comfortable is different for different people who are acclimated to different weather.
We need a defined ‘mild’ temperature. i vote for 70F/21C.
It’s a bit chilly for the warm weathered folks and a bit warm for the cold weathered folks. Seems reasonable but I’m open to suggestions.
As a cold weathered folk, I can confirm that 70 is my upper limit for nice temperature
I’d adjust it to 68/20 just so it lines up with whole numbers in both systems. And on second thought, make it 90 per degree Fahrenheit so any whole F or C value can convert to a whole number.
it needs to be a range, you can’t really just have a single point, something like 50f to 70f would be good. Some people like a little below, some people like a little above, the 60s are generally pretty comfy all around though.
We also need to consider clothing as well. Which i do in this case.
0 for freezing because water falls from the fucking sky.
You can absolutely yell about that. And when Fahrenheit flips to negative, you’re ready to express some big feelings about how fucking cold it is.
You mean it’s THREE HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN FUCKING DEGREES OUTSIDE?!
And Rankine would be even better than Kelvin in terms of “big number go brrr.” Water boils at 671 R.
Of course, Rankine is the most obnoxious unit I’ve ever had to deal with, but those numbers sure are big!
Americans cannot understand any metric
2 liter bottle.
Checkmate, athiests.
Also we have electric, water and gas meters smh
This is why I say ‘metre’ for the measure and ‘meter’ for the measurement device
And Demeter for the harvest
9mm
We’re more familiar with 5.56x45mm thanks to all our school shootings thank you very much.
In the same way a US ton and a metric ton is like 10% different, a 556 bullet is actually 5.7 mm across.
Because the minor diameter of the barrel is 5.56 mm and the major diameter is 5.69 mm. If the bullet were smaller than that then the propellant would blow past it. They didn’t make a 'murican millimetre like they did with the imperial system.
I would make a bet that more mass shootings are done with 9mm. Depending on which shootings they consider ‘mass’ I see estimates from 60-80% for handgun usage. I’m sure the cheap .22 is a large number, but 9mm is probably right up there. There is a large bias in reporting the school shootings and shootings involving rifles by the media. They almost ignore the others.
28 grams to an ounce
In point of fact Americans have gotten impressive results out of far more complicated metrics than metric. It’s not a matter of understanding, it’s a matter of pride. And of not having to buy all new tools.
OK, but with Rankine, if it’s 101 out, you can go Five Hundred and SIXTY degrees??!
“Kelvin” sounds a lot like “communism” you pinko
Please raise this temperature by 1.4x10^-23 Joules - statements of the utterly deranged
Joules are energy. You need thermal capacity to turn them into temperature.
Fahrenheit is better because 69 is a nice temperature
Celsius is better because 69 is very hot
Yes but we all know you will never experience that 69 (and I think you know it too)
You do experience 69°C if you go to sauna before it’s warm
What? Never been in a sauna? Do it, it’s really nice!
Meh… Give it another couple of decades.
Fahrenheit is best for ambient temperatures. 0 F is what humans feel is a very cold day, and 100 F is what humans feel is a very hot day.
Celsius is best for literally everything else, but for humans feeling of ambient temperature Fahrenheit is best
only if you grow up with fahrenheit.
So you’re saying that 0 and 100 aren’t intuitively obvious? I find that really strange when it’s doing a better job keeping to base 10 than the metric system in this particular use case.
For Celsius, 0 is freezing cold and 100 is boiling hot - that’s intuitive too.
I have literally never felt 0°F in my life and couldn’t tell you how cold it is, just that it’s very cold. I believe everyone has a rough understanding how 0°C and 100°C feel though.
It is intuitive, and that’s fine. Having the same intuition around human comfort zones is also fine. One measurement system can’t really cover everything.
People tend not to want to live in places where it’s routinely under 0F or over 100F. You’ll tolerate it, but you won’t like it. It’s a very natural range of human comfort.
When it comes to a single number on a scale, whatever you grew up with will be more “obvious”. 100F doesn’t give me any more information than 38C does. The whole “base 10” thing only matters if you are actually doing some math to that number.
Base 10 makes it much easier to remember.
When was the last time you did math related to temperature?
Kelvin is used for math pretty regularly. Rankine was too.
For day to day use, it’s just a single number, no one is doing any conversions, etc, with the number. That was my point. There’s nothing to remember. Do you forget what 72F feels like? Do you have to scale it in your head?
base 10 is literally just 0-9 so yeah, everyone remembers that.
scaling based on the base 10 figure makes conversions easier, so there’s that.
100F definitely gives more insight as to the temperature. It’s a 100/100. That’s as hot as a person can really tolerate. If you understand percentages or how to rate things on a scale of 1-10, you understand fahrenheit.
There’s large chunks of the world proving that false every day. For the geographically impared, the simple fact that Phoenix has existed for longer than air conditioning, proves that statement false.
And 0F as the low point is equally as useless.
That’s why I used the qualifier “really” and in another comment I mentioned “in average temperate climates” If you were more familiar with statistics you would understand how means and outliers work. Just like someone can score a movie an 11/10 or a -1/10, it is possible for the weather to exceed 100F or drop below 0F. Just not typical.
And while I didn’t say it specifically, 0F is similarly the average lowest temperature a person can tolerate/expect before beginning to experience problems.
Hypothermia can be a problem in temperatures as high as 50F. 0F is a meaningless number, outside of purely subjective “it’s cold” uses.
“Can be” Yeah if you’re submerged in 50F water you will succumb to hypothermia due to the specific heat of water.
But we’re not discussing swimming pool temperatures, we’re discussing air temperatures. You are not actively in danger of imminent hypothermia at 50F air temp like you are at 0F air temp.
But of course you know that already. You’re not here arguing in good faith, you just want to sling shit at people that have a better understanding of the world than you. If you want to use Celsius for everything, go ahead. No one cares. But the intelligent world will keep using both.
Lol
fun fact about phoenix, going outside on a day that’s about 100f, is not fucking pleasant they literally have air misters to help provide cooling, which barely does anything.
People are just fucking insane and will live in places like alaska where the ground is literally frozen all year round. Phoneix AZ is not “habitable”, it’s bearable. Also a lot of these places, especially in hotter dryer regions, will have covered sidewalks to provide shade, (at least historically) people would and still do wear large hats to block a lot of the sun. Even then a lot of people wouldn’t spend a whole bunch of time outside in that heat.
also, have you seen death valley? It kills people, every fucking year.
the numbers may be, but if you asked me to tell you what they feel like i would have to convert them to celsius first. where i live temperatures are generally between -30 and +30, and i could tell you in an instant what I would wear for a given temperature in that range. 50F though? no clue. since it’s right between 0 and 100 i guess it would be just right, temperature wise, so t-shirt and long pants?
Can you remember that at temperatures near 0F and 100F, you need to take special precautions when going outside? The rest is a matter of getting used to what the numbers mean, but those are very intuitive danger points.
-18 is such an arbitrary place for “special precautions”. at 0, I know to start driving more carefully since the roads ice up. at -15, i know to wear long johns. at +15, i know to start using a thinner jacket. at -30, i know to use a thick hat and wax on my cheeks to prevent the blood vessels from rupturing. at +30, I know to use a large hat and sun cream on my cheeks to prevent them from burning.
cool little trick, you see how -18 is like, pretty close to -20, yeah. You can just round them. It really doesn’t matter
see, that’s what i’m saying. having a scale that starts at “it really doesn’t matter” makes it hard to use for everyday things.
but it literally has numbers?
You know that celsius starts at -273.15 degrees right? That’s ENTIRELY arbitrary, and by your logic, makes the system useless.
you’re literally just making this up?
no, Celsius starts at +273.15 K, because that’s where an element we are all dependent on to live and in contact with every day undergoes an important phase transition.
What happens at 0°F?
why does it matter? Water freezes at 32 degrees f. What happens at 32 degrees C? What happens at 212 degrees C?
Also no, it doesn’t start at +273.15 K, that’s not how number ranges work. If you have a list of numbers between -10 and 10. And you were to sort them, least to most, -10 would be at the bottom, obviously.
you realize that temperature is a measure of the energy within a substance/material right? It’s intrinsically tried to the physics and atomic structure underlying the material substance. That always starts at the lowest temperature point, the point being where it is is just a reference
it starts at +273.15K because that is the lower of the two reference points used in its creation. the Kelvin scale was created later and builds on the Celsius scale. of course lower temps are sorted first, that’s not what matters. it’s why we call these scales “degrees”, after all.
why it matters is because the scale i use every day constantly gets “verified” by passing the zero marker and showing that things outside freeze. that makes it a good reference point that builds its own intuition.
that’s what this is all about, after all: how useful a scale is for everyday use. a scale that is relevant to my needs and that has important events happen on easy-to-remember points of the scale requires very little teaching.
any number is equally as good for an arbitrary reference point. And it can arguably be even more confusing, let’s take a page out of CS acronyms and short hands. GB and GiB (often shortened improperly) GB being 1000, GiB being 1024. Now i feel like i don’t have to explain why this is a bad thing.
1024 is an odd unit, but it’s sequential powers of 2, so it’s trivial to think about. 1000 is a nice unit, but it doesn’t map nicely into storage, or binary strings.
like to me the difference between 0-100 and 32-212 is basically nothing. Sure it’s a weird number, but they’re both numbers so. Really the only proper utility it has is the SI unit meta, and the fact that it maps into kelvin. Outside of that i don’t see why 0 or 32 as the freezing point are any different. It might be more visually pleasing, but like, fahrenheit also takes that one as well, given that the 0f-100f thing is accurate. I feel like they’re just equivalent.
i just don’t see why it matters, like at all. People do much more complicated things on a daily basis. People remember random strings of numbers as passcodes, people remember random strings of letters as for passwords.
idk i feel like it’s just weird to sit here on the internet and complain about how you need water to freeze at 0 degrees, and how it must boil at 100 degrees. When neither of those are like, relevant? For most day to day activities at least. Maybe in the winter, but again, 32.
would it be nicer if fahrenheit suddenly had water freeze at 0f tomorrow, as well as boil at 200f? Probably, but like, i wouldn’t care. It just seems like such an odd thing to care about to me.
this all started because of the claim that Fahrenheit is better for “human” temperatures. when saying “that’s just because you’re used to it” apparently wasn’t valid, it spiralled on into this massive discussion where i’ve tried to show with what i feel is quite a lot of anecdata that indeed, you only feel that Fahrenheit is better for human temperatures because you’re used to it. meanwhile, the rest of the world can’t understand these numbers at all because they are not used to them, and use Celsius for human temperatures every day.
of course it doesn’t matter. at least, not in a vacuum. but when interacting with the rest of the world, it does.
so technically, it was originally a shitpost about how fahrenheit temperatures can go above 100, which is clearly better.
beyond that, a lot of people just proposed that fahrenheit is nice because “the 0-100 metric is kind of nice and lines up conveniently” which is perfectly accurate, as evidenced by people existing and using it, there’s not exactly a psyop for making people think fahrenheit is better lol.
literally the primary distinction here, is that celsius users think celsius is better because “water freezes at 0, and boils at 100” and fahrenheit users have merely proposed that “fahrenheit lines up fairly nicely with the human experience such that 0f is cold and 100f is hot”
and then celsius users have pretty much gone ape shit over these statements.
like to be clear, both of these arguments are literally the same.
this is like being an english only speaker, and then discovering that the french language genders tables. And then becoming entirely irate over the fact that this language that you don’t know, and can’t speak genders tables.
You see my problem here right? Like it’s funny as a shitpost, but celsius users are grabbing a ratchet, realizing they don’t know how to use them, accidentally clobbering themselves over the head with it, and then being really confused and mad when people think that this is a pretty silly thing to do.
like it’s great that you guys don’t know fahrenheit because the rest of the world uses celsius. That’s great for you, who asked though? You can do the same things with race and gender as well. “white people are more advanced, surely we must be smarter right?”
like with all due respect, to you and everybody else who uses celsius, this is stupid. I don’t know if you guys think that fahrenheit people don’t know that celsius has a better boiling point of water, we know all of this shit. And we can even convert back into celsius, more often than not, because we have to interact with you guys, more frequently. Because statistically, there are more of you. Like the sheer amount of people in this thread that were just pretentious for no reason, is mindbogglingly astounding.
Like unironically, having seen this thread twice, once on reddit. I legitimately hold less of an opinion of Europeans now. Like from my perspective, these people are just whining and complaining about the most asinine of things, “oh no 96f, that’s not a nice number” yeah, it’s a conversion bro. What did you expect? And then when i mention that these are unreasonable opinions, as they are. Obviously. (so would any countering opinions, naturally) they get really confused or just say really stupid things? I’ve had people unironically tell me that there are different climates, like america doesn’t have any of those. I’ve had someone compare 0f to 100f, in the same exact situation. Literally just going outside naked. Why? Who goes outside naked when it’s cold?
You could tell me that this is a once yearly european psyop to make americans think that europeans are stupid, and i would believe you.
like i’m genuinely so confused, because i can’t tell if this is just some incredibly elaborate troll, or if celsius users genuinely can’t think outside of a box.
…yeah.
yeah no shit, but think of it this way, if you were put into a place that was 100f, you would go “damn this bitch hot out here” and if you were put into a place that was 0f you would go “damn this joint cold as fuck fr”
Stop thinking in celsius.
why would i stop? there’s only one place in the world that uses another scale, and it’s dangerous for me to even travel there.
because we’re not talking about celsius? We’re talking about fahrenheit?
This is like pulling up to a car meet in a semi truck, and being really confused when nobody thinks your ride is sick.
the parent post was literally about Fahrenheit vs Celsius.
it was literally about fahrenheit*
Specifically, it was about how in fahrenheit we can refer to really hot temperatures as “OVER 100F”
but it was also a shitpost, like this post, so we probably shouldn’t care about it this much lmao
i am referring the the post i responded to.
yeah, that was my post.
What if it was 99f? Or 1f? Would your scientific “damn this bitch hot out here” change to something else?
no? Because it’s not entirely hinged around the temperature being one specific number???
Do you think the human body is a perfectly accurate thermometer?
No, they’re not. I couldn’t tell what those numbers mean even if you asked, but I can tell what 0°C outside feels, and what 100°C sauna feels. I can also tell that 21°C is a nice ambient temperature for chilling, and 15-20°C is ideal for most outdoor sports.
Yeah sure those are not necessarily nice round numbers, but I’ve used the scale all my life so it’s intuitive to me, same as the Fahrentrash is intuitive to you
No, that’s not how this works.
You understand the concept of a scale. If I asked you to rate something on a scale of 1-10, you know what i mean. It has nothing to do with intuitiveness. If I asked you to rate something on a scale of 7-23, you’d know what I mean, even though the numbers are different than what you’re used to.
So if I said it was 100F outside, you’d know that’s very uncomfortably hot, as hot as a normal person can really tolerate, because you’d recognize it as the high end of the scale.
Everyone can understand fahrenheit, some people just try really hard not to.
You really don’t understand what reference points are. The scale is useless without reference points, and I’m not accustomed to them while I have very clear ones for Celsius.
Sure I can understand that 100F feels very hot, but if I was outside in that temperature I couldn’t tell you an estimate in Fahrenheit how hot it feels
The reference points are 0 and 100! You don’t have to get accustomed to them, they are the same reference points used by the entire base-10 numerical system. It is a percentage.
And yes, you could step out into 100F degree heat and accurately estimate the temperature. Is it the hottest day of summer? Are you beginning to experience symptoms of heat fatigue? Are you saying to yourself “This is one of the hottest days I have ever experienced”, all the same stuff you’d think if you stepped outside into 37.8C weather. Then it’s probably close to the high end of the scale, i.e. 100F.
Okay so you’re making lot of weird assumptions here. I don’t know how hot weather 37°C feels, other than that for me 30+ is absolute hell. I’ve never experienced heatwave that bad for what I remember. Hottest summer days here are just about 30°C, and it’s miserable.
Reference point means that I’m able to easily understand what that temperature is.
I can easily understand 100°C though, sauna is getting too hot and I should open window and chill down with feeding the fire.
For 0-30 I can easily understand how I should dress outside, and 0°C is easy to understand because just above it and I know it’s going to be wet and slippery if there was negatives before it, and below 0 is slippery if there was positives earlier.
What is intuitive to you is totally a subjective experience based on your earlier experiences and what you’re used to use to measure temperatures.
Lmao your sauna is not clearing 100C, that’s well past the point at which saunas can become hazardous to your health. If you genuinely run your sauna that hot then start looking into competitions because you’re gonna blow all those professionals out of the water.
Also I’m not making any assumptions here. That’s just you trying to grasp at straws to save your failing argument. You don’t know what 37C feels like? Weird, I know what 100F feels like. I guess fahrenheit is just more intuitive than Celsius (by your logic, anyway).
Also, all you’ve done is list a bunch of understandings about Celsius that depend entirely on experience and prior knowledge. “Above 0 is like this, below is like that, I know how to dress for 0-30” This is all stuff you had to be taught/learn, the exact opposite of intuitive.
But I can say to someone unfamiliar with either system “Fahrenheit is a 0-100 scale of hot how it is outside” and they know almost everything they need to know about fahrenheit.
In International Sauna Championships the sauna was heated to 110°C. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Sauna_Championships?w…
Dry sauna at 100°C is not terribly hot feeling, but then again I don’t like dry sauna. In those competitions the sauna was NOT dry, but water thrown onto the rocks every 30sec. That’s actual hell to be in
Exactly. Because that is required to understand what the numbers mean. Congratulations for understanding what I said while completely missing the point
Fahrenheit is none of that. It requires prior knowledge and understanding where the scale lies. By your logic, 50°F should be perfectly nice ambient temperature, but in reality it’s plenty cold enough for hypothermia
What makes you think humans, an endothermic species, desires exactly 50% thermal energy? We enjoy the 70F region because we are warm blooded mammals.
“In International Sauna Championships the sauna was heated to 110°C” Yeah. And 2 people collapsed, 1 died from it. www.bbc.com/news/magazine-10912578 A 5-time champion who had excellent tolerance.
“Exactly. Because that is required to understand what the numbers mean (in celsius)”
Exactly, because fahrenheit doesn’t require such a random set of arbitrary associations. Congratulations for understanding what I said while trying so hard to miss the point.
Look, you can argue all you want. The fact is that both systems have their applications. I don’t believe you genuinely disagree with this statement. I think you’re just here because you want to sling shit at people that are different than you. Nothing you say will make Celsius better at determining ambient temperature, nothing you say will make fahrenheit better for use in a lab. Get over it.
I dunno, man. You’ve been driving home this idea that Fahrenheit is a scale and therefore great for intuiting ambient temperature, you can’t just turn around and be all ‘Well OBVIOUSLY 50% isn’t the neutral point.’
In any scale where 0 is dangerously low and 10 is dangerously high, 5 would be a happy medium.
That’s simply not how scales work. You’ll figure it out someday.
It’s how useful scales work.
But well done on the Herculean effort you’ve put forth in demonstrating your general ignorance.
0 and 100 aren’t just “very cold” and “very hot”. They are potentially dangerously so, and you need to take extra precautions at temperatures beyond those limits. You don’t necessarily have to understand it beyond that.
It is pretty funny how your supposed completely intuitive human feeling system needs to have all these disclaimers added to it whenever you try to explain it. Perhaps it is only intuitive because you are used to it after all?
Three sentences is a lot of disclaimers to you? Really?
If you’d say it is 100F outside, I wouldn’t know what you mean because I have no concept of Fahrenheit. Is 100F actually hot? What is that in Celsius? Do you mean hot as in “better to wear light clothes” or “Do not set a foot outside or you will melt”?
What does it mean “as hot as a normal person can really tolerate”? What about a abnormal person?
It gives nothing of information. Just a rough indication of what it might be. Which isn’t useful at all.
Do you understand the base-10 numerical system? Do you understand percentages? Congratulations, you understand fahrenheit. You can no longer honestly say, on the internet or otherwise, that fahrenheit is meaningless to you. You are now a fahrenheit understander, whether you like it or not.
Also, your second statement answers your first question. When I say “as hot as a normal person can tolerate” i do not mean “wear light clothes”, I mean “as hot as a normal person can tolerate”. Thats why i said “as hot as a normal person can tolerate”. Happy to clear that up you for you.
Abnormalities/outliers are not something on which we should base standards of measurements.
You keep saying this but it still doesn’t make any sense. 50% heat would be average middle of the pack nice? And “as hot as normal person can tolerate” is full of shit because neither you or I have no concept of what “normal person can tolerate”, as the normal depends on your geography. And this is quite a good reason why claiming “Fahrenheit is how human feels” is just idiotic as it relies both on a specific climate and having learned that scale growing up.
I swear you Americans can get so fucking stupid on this topic, it’s like claiming that Finnish is the most intuitive language because it’s the language of how love (average love, excluding outliers obviously) feels
Lmao and there it is.
“You americans”
It was never about temperature. You just love any excuse to shit on people that are different.
God forbid a country teach the value of both systems. Your tiny mind evidently cannot comprehend the very idea of 2+ methods of measurement.
And yes, no matter how much you screech to the contrary, there is a maximum safe temperature a human can exist in, and it’s roughly 100F. Yes that varies based on an individuals tolerances, which is why I’ve specified on many occasions that it’s representative of the average climate in a temperate region. If you were capable of reading, you’d know that.
They aren’t. And fahrenheit is not a 0-100 scale. It is just the scale you picked out of it in order to make some kind of sense out of the non-intuitive system which it is.
100F was defined as the human body temperature (The guy they used had a cold or something so it’s off by a degree and a half.)
That’s useful for perception of heat. When the dry bulb gets above 100F, wind only cools you down by sweat evaporation, and when the wet bulb gets above 100F, even that can’t cool you down, and you will die if you don’t get to a cooler or drier environment.
This is more intuitive than 36.5C.
what Fahrenheit used for his endpoints was 1) the melting point of a brine mixture that he didn’t write down the ratio of, and 2) his wife’s armpit.
those “bulb” things is something i only ever hear of from americans. it’s never used here.
and I fail to see how two numbers are somehow differently intuitive. they are just numbers. also, 36.5 is too low. it’s pretty much 37.0 now, because average body temp has interestingly enough shifted since he took those measurements.
What does Europe use for apparent temperature measurement then? Just humidity and not evaporation?
temperature, wind speed and direction, and humidity are given separately. regular news report style forecasts don’t give humidity at all.
What’s a dry/wet bulb?
Dry bulb is the temperature independent of humidity. Wet bulb is has a wet cloth on the thermometer bulb. This simulates how much sweat cools you in the current humidity and wind.
Measuring humidity instead and cross-referencing to get heat index is more common these days, but IMO it’s worse. 120 in the desert vs 120 heat index due to humidity is the difference between someone using a hair dryer on your face and getting cooked in a steam room, and it doesn’t consider wind and cloud cover.
Wait, doesn’t everybody walk around with a pocket psychrometric chart?
Dry bulb is a normal temperature reading with say a thermometer. Wet bulb is that same thermometer but it is wrapped in a wet cloth to simulate evaporation of sweat.
The purpose of wet bulb temperature measurement is to fix the dangerous temperature threshold at body temperature instead of having to adjust for humidity. So if the wet bulb temperature crosses 35C/95F you know that it is dangerous to even be outside because your sweat can’t even evaporate enough to prevent you from overheating just standing in the shade.
Um. No.
If I said a movie was a 7/10, you would understand what that means because it’s a scale. You don’t have to “grow up” using a 0-10 scale to understand it.
Like if I asked you to rate something on a scale of 4-17, you’d understand what I mean. The numbers are different but the concept of a scale remains the same.
.
Really not. Basically, you just need to peg feelings to a number, just like you are doing.
Celsius:
below -20 = deadly even with good gear, you can’t spend long here
-15 = very dangerous / deadly
-10 = starting to get dangerous
-5 = starting to get uncomfortable
0 = very cold
5 = cold
10 = a little cold
15 = cool
20 = nice
25 = warm
30 = hot
35 = starting to get uncomfortable
40 = starting to get dangerous
45 = very dangerous / deadly
50+ = deadly even with good gear, you can’t spend long here
I don’t think you understand what I said.
Also, that’s a lot of explaining, and lots of feelings associated with arbitrary numbers. Fahrenheit doesn’t need anywhere near that level of explanation. It doesn’t necessitate the pegging of feelings to random numbers.
The sentence “Fahrenheit is a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” is all anyone needs to immediately understand and be able to use fahrenheit. I didn’t need to type out a long list of what each temperature value means to me. There is no need for a mneumonic such as “10 is cold, 20s not, 30s warm, and 40s hot”
If you’re doing math in a lab, absolutely use Celsius. I’m not saying it doesn’t have a place. It’s just not the be-all end-all most perfectest temperature measurement system ever.
I think you are projecting your feeling onto others; I don’t have “a mneumonic” in my head. That was for your benefit, since you are not immersed in that scale.
When I see the weather report and it says tomorrow it is going to be 25 degrees with light wind, I know that it will be a pleasant day. The same way I know what the reporter is saying, I have been immersed in the English language since birth, it requires no though to understand the words they are saying.
It requires no thought to understand that 25 degrees and light wind is a nice day. It just is.
I don’t have that intuitive sense for the F scale, I always have to convert it to a sensible number. I know 100 is around 37, which is really hot.
But it requires you to be familiar with an arbitrary -20 - 40 scale. Which makes way less sense than a 0-100 scale.
I don’t need to use the mnemonic either, I grew up in the U.S. so I understand both systems perfectly well. But the mnemonic exists because Celsius uses an inherently less sensible scale. You only understand it internally because you grew up with it. A person who grew up with neither system would find fahrenheit easier to understand from an unbiased position because it’s more logical.
deg C is no more arbitrary than deg F; any more than French is more arbitrary than English.
It is a strange argument to say “You only understand it internally because you grew up with it.”; well yes, but that is exactly the same with the deg F scale.
In your opinion.
In my opinion it is far more logical to base you temperature scale on repeatable physical measurements, than say what a person feels.
0 C = water freezes
0 F =
100 C = water boils
100 F = best estimate for average human body temperature.
The F scale is not built on logic.
Okay yeah you’re totally right Celsius is the most perfectest and wonderful system of temperature measurement and it can do everything and it’s magical and perfect for every single application ever.
Sure, bud.
Also “repeatable physical measurements” I think I found your problem. You seem to think that a fahrenheit thermometer will display a different temperature each time something is measured, even if the temperature has not changed. Allow me to clarify for you: if you measure something at a constant temperature more than once with a fahrenheit thermometer, the thermometer will display the same value each time, just like Celsius. I can see how that misconception could’ve led to your confusion, I’m glad I could help you to understand better. Let me know if you need anything else explained to you.
Of course the last bastion of the failed debate; ad hominem and straw man.
Have a fine day.
Of course the last bastion of the failed debate, a poor attempt to dismiss the oppositions’ arguments as logical fallacies. The only problem is you clearly have no idea what either of those logical fallacies are. Didn’t even mention reductio ad absurdum.
It’s ridiculous that you’re actually here arguing that there’s absolutely no place in modern science for the fahrenheit system of measurement. What a backwards, preposterous stance to take. Your small-mindedness will not serve you.
You literally were refuting points that I didn’t make, that is a straw man. You stopped debating in good faith; therefore the debate is over.
Again; I didn’t say that, that is you.
Now that the debate is over we may commence the shit slinging.
You sir, are an uneducated rat fondler; I hope you enjoy your mothers basement.
My dude, my entire claim is “both systems of measurement have their applications” And you objected to that. You are here right now arguing the contrary. You chose to voice an opposing opinion.
Do you even know what your point is? Are you seriously so unfulfilled that you’re here just arguing for the sake of arguing?
Look, I’ve made my point, I’ve provided arguments to support it. I’m not gonna keep arguing with some edgelord. Good luck with whatever.
It is pretty funny how you keep claiming “fahrenheit is the best system for human temperature” countless times. Celsius users then question that, though without claiming celsius is better, it is just something we are used to.
And then you get all pissy and strawman celsius users as saying the exact thing you have been claiming about fahrenheit this entire thread.
Your 0-100 scale is just as arbitrary, in fact even more, since it doesn’t even cover the daily temperatures huge parts of the global population lives in.
if I knew that you are a european and you told me a movie was 5/10, i would assume it was average. if i knew you were American, i would assume it was dogshit.
Americans have a weird relationship with numbers.
also, as mentioned in another post: if 0 is too cold and 100 is too hot, surely 50 would be a pleasant temperature?
“Americans” ah, I see. You don’t actually care about effective systems of measurement, you just want to shit on people that are different from you.
Also, as answered in another post: Why would you assume that humans, an endothermic species, prefers exactly 50% thermal energy? Of course we sit around the 70F region, we’re warm-blooded mammals. We don’t want to be half cold, we want to be mostly warm.
No matter how much you complain or argue, it’s never going to be true that Celsius is the one-and-only most perfect system of temperature measurement. The fact is that both systems have their applications, as any intelligent member of the scientific community would tell you.
Get over it.
considering america is the only place that uses it, i can’t really find any other factor to use.
the point of a temperature scale is to quantify temperature as to ease its communication. if one player is using a different scale that’s just complicating things.
also, if its an “intuitive” scale, surely it should take human bias into account?
Dear god, is Fahrenheit the reason behind meaningless movie ratings? Another reason to hate it…
fahrenheit doesn’t exist if you use celsius i guess??
It doesn’t, because celsius users doesn’t think about fahrenheit at all.
yeah, and it seems to me like they’re the wrong ones here, because i can think about things in celsius perfectly fine without my worldview imploding, in fact i can pretty accurately estimate temperature conversions even.
Like it’s great that you guys don’t have to use it, but please think about it a little bit harder before saying something really goofy that can be explained easily. Or just like, shitpost.
Use Kelvin then, 314°K is a way bigger number
No °, just K
314 K
<img alt="" src="https://startrek.website/pictrs/image/4f5488f3-6409-41d3-b14e-87eac298444d.gif">
But really it is much better for human temperatures.
It’s just intuitive, 0F is 0% hot, and 100F is 100% hot.
When the dry bulb gets above 100F, wind only cools you down by sweat evaporation, and when the wet bulb gets above 100F, even that can’t cool you down, and you will die if you don’t get to a cooler or drier environment.
I love it when it’s -10% hot in winter nights or 110% hot around the equator. Makes perfect sense.
Yes, it does a better job of impressing that is all of the hot (or cold), and then 10% more than the difference between 38 and 43
Any of the systems is better if you have an intuitive understanding of it. I don’t know what 107 F would feel like, just as you don’t know what 42°C feels like. But it’s not a thing where one is inherently better than the other…
i assure you, we who grew up with celsius absolutely know the dire difference between 38 and 43. 38 is death, 43 is the crimson realms where even souls wither.
all this “which one is better for x” is nonsense, you develop a feel for whichever you grew up with. it’s just that the math is less stupid with metric. that’s all.
Yes, it does, actually, if you understand how thermal energy works.
“Intuitive” is a meaningless metric for a single scaled number. Whichever system you are used to will be the more “intuitive”.
Also, climate can play into which system feels more useful. Where I live, 100F occurs only rarely (and since air conditioning is almost ubiquitous, not something I’d bother looking out for), while 0C is an outdoor temperature that I do need to be aware of for half the year.
I disagree that either would be just as intuitive. Fahrenheit being 0=cold and 100=hot is intuitive because there are a lot of things we do in the world that exist on a scale of 0 - 100. Percentages, just off the bat. Also, fahrenheit has a higher degree of fidelity in the temperature range that we use.
Celsius’s general temperature scale is like -10 - 40 which is absolutely not intuitive because it doesn’t look like any other scale we use as humans. I agree that we get used to Celsius fast and it’s a fine it’s not like it’s super confusing (and Celsius is so much more useful scientifically).
Which system did you grow up with? Because I grew up from the start with Celsius und it is 100% intuitive to me. Everytime you americans use your funny temperature numbers I have to stop and use a tool for transforming it or I simply ignore it and go “low means cold and high means hot, how high? Ain’t nobody got time for dat!”
So I disagree with your notion that Fahrenheit is intuitive. The system you grew up with and have multiple experiences as reference points for, is the system you feel is intuitive is also my opinion.
What you grew up with =/= what is intuitive.
That is not what intuitive means. You’re talking about what’s “familiar”.
Familiarity is subjective. Intuitiveness is objective.
If we want to go that road, intuition is according to Wikipedia:
Since every temperature system needs an explanation, namely the reference points, no system is or even can be intuitive per this definition.
That’s not either scale being intuitive or unintuitive, that’s your familiarity with one over the other.
I got curious so I did some research on the definitions and why everything is this way. It looks like they originally picked the coldest thing they had (brine, possibly inspired by the coldest weather), the freezing point of water, human body temperature, and the boiling point of water. It was supposed to be brine at 0, water freezing at 30, the human body at 90, and water boiling at 240. Fahrenheit then recalibrated his scale slightly to make his math (and thermometer design and production) easier, and also because he noticed water actually boiled at 212 by his newly modified scale.
Looking at it like that work the context of what they had at the time and what they were trying to do, it makes a lot of sense.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#History
Never said either one can’t be intuitive, just that the scale of farenheit has a precedence outside of it being an arbitrary temperature measurement by being a scale that goes from about 0 - 100.
If you had never used either scale and some one asked: “which is more intuitive, a temperature scale where -10 is really cold and 40 is really hot or one where 0 is really cold and 100 is really hot?” I know which one I would pick because I’ve done things before like calculate percentages and work in a base 10 system so it makes sense for the scale to be between two orders of magnitude.
But that is what we others are saying: there is no “more intuitive” system, just one you know better and can quicker evaluate how it would feel! So you agree with us.
Everything you said can be said about Celsius scale as well.
There is also a precedence for Celsius more than just an arbitrary number between 0 & 100.
A scale for liquid water, you know, the stuff that is the reason why we call our little spaceship "the blue marble"and why we even have this discussion, because it is the basis of all life on earth, is also not a bad choice for a number between 0-100.
And you made me curious: in what context did you have to calculate percentages of temperature that were not in Kelvin? Because as soon as percentages and temperatures are close to each other in one sentence the only example I can think of are things like reaction kinetic calculations and those are neither in Celsius nor in Fahrenheit.
You should examine your definition of intuitive. Yes, technically nothing is intuitive it’s just based on what you know because intuition is also based on what you’re used to.
By your logic, if you compare a machine that powers on by pressing a big glowing red button labeled “ON” and one that turns on by you performing the haka in front of a camera while reciting a Shakespeare sonnet backwards you might say that there is no “more intuitive” way to turn on a machine, just one you know better and can perform quicker!
You aren’t reading what you’re replying to because I said in a previous post that it’s easy to get used to Celsius and fahrenheit and there’s no difference to either and I also already said that Celsius is better for science because it’s based on water.
At this point you’re just lying or further proving that you didn’t even read the post you tried to respond patronizingly to. I said that the Fahrenheit scale is intuitive because it’s a 0-100 scale which is similar to other scales we use all the time and works well for our base 10 counting system being a scale essentially between two powers of 10. Neither of that can be said for Celsius and that’s so obvious I think you just didn’t read it before replying.
And hell, on top of all this, I think we should all switch to using Celsius! Because as I mentioned it’s easy to grasp both scales and using Celsius makes understanding a lot of science easier which I think is the only real argument in this arbitrary choice between the two! But I’m out here explaining the use of Fahrenheit because people here can’t grasp my explanation for why people might use it and are acting like they’ve got the defeater to a post they didn’t even read!
But fahrenheit is not a 0-100 scale. You have just arbitrarily picked out 0-100 because that makes your brain more easily understand the non-intuitive system which is fahrenheit.
It has only been 100°F once in the last century. Nobody has any point of reference to make this intuitive. 30°C/85°F is defined as hot around here. 40°C/100°F is defined as national emergency.
“It has only been 100F once in the last century”
Lmao what?? Go ahead and find me a source for that.
I guarantee you it reaches 100F regularly during summer in many temperate climates, that’s not even including warmer regions.
Do you think your little small town is the only place in the universe?
Not when it’s near the sea, like most of western Europe. It’s the same shit as “why don’t you have airco?” Because it was never that hot.
Tell that to the gulf coast, or Mexico, or central America, or Africa, or Australia.
Your experiences are not universal. Just because you’ve never seen 100F doesn’t mean no one else has. That’s absurd.
The heat index gets over 100°F in much of the southern US every summer
“cold” and “hot” are completely non-descriptive and useless parameters for your supposed “intuitive” system.
Being 41% of the way to boiling water sounds pretty hot to me, too.
How is 0F 100% cold though, most places will never get that cold, so it surely makes more sense to have 0F at freezing point of water and 100F at 38C?
Not to mention negative numbers.
Freezing point of pure water - but saltwater/brine freezes as a different temperature.
pure water at mean atmosphere pressure at sea level if we’re getting technical, but frankly human body temperature varies from 35.5C (95.9F) to 37.5C (99.5F) anyway, and that’s before considering when people are ill, so if we go down that route it falls apart quickly enough that the definition of 100 given above is clearly just as arbitrary
I’m okay with “mean atmosphere pressure” bc that’s what is most likely to occur, whereas pure water seems far less likely to be found in a coastal village. The oddness of the measuring abilities of the devices made at the time is a more damning argument, but less for them back then and more for us now. Still, roughly negative ten to 40 for Celsius vs. roughly zero to one hundred for Fahrenheit, the latter does seem to use more “natural” numbers, even if nothing else about non-metric systems makes any sense.
So 50% is perfect temperature, no?
Lol, 0F is not 100% cold. That is barely cold unless you live in very warm place like tropic or something
Do you live in northern canada?
Europe
People do live outside of North America. I know that must be news to you, but it is the truth.
When I was out in SD recently the temperature was reaching 100F or above frequently and it sucked but it wasn’t that bad. Where I live in Cali and it gets that hot by the beach with humidity well into the 70% range sometimes I literally felt like I was about to die just sitting inside with a fan blowing right at me. Humidity is such a huge factor.
Is 50°F 50% cold or 50% hot?
I like the saying “Fahrenheit is what you feel, Celsius is what water feels, and Kelvin is what the universe feels”.
Fahrenheit is what Americans feel, Celsius is what everyone else feels, and Kelvin is just Celsius +273.
Ftfy
273.15
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin
Oops you’re right. I just converted 1°C to kelvin and brain farted
Fahrenheit is what everyone feels. It’s a scale of 0 to 100 of how hot it is outside. Excluding extreme outliers, it covers the range of temperatures the average human might experience. In Celsius that’s like -20 to 40. I personally use Celsius anyway, because I don’t consider it much of an inconvenience, but Fahrenheit is certainly the more human-centric scale.
This is no way describes how I feel. I almost never experience below -5C, e.g. like 20F, but from there down it doesn’t really matter if it’s 10F or -10F. You need special clothing and then you’re fine.
While my pain point is at 95F, most people I know consider “hot outside” being around 80F, and “unbearably hot outside” at around 88F. So, how is this intuitive?
Okay. Fahrenheit did. 0°F was supposedly based on the lowest air temperature he measured in his hometown.
This isn’t about pain points and special clothing, it’s about measuring the typical range of climate.
Exactly. He did. I don’t. So, don’t push on me some guy’s hometown lowest temperature as a 0.
(Also he did a bit more than just measure the low of his hometown, but it sorta correlates to his location)
It’s a system designed to correlate to typical ambient temperatures, which it does. Just as Celsius is designed to correlate to water temperatures, and Kelvin is designed to correlate to absolute temperatures. Hence the top comment: Fahrenheit is how humans feel (range of climate temperatures humans live in), Celsius is how water feels (range of temperatures for liquid water), Kelvin is how the universe feels (range of all temperatures).
Denying the nature of the general scale because you don’t personally use the whole thing is as silly as calling Celsius pointless because you don’t personally use ice cubes.
this is pretty well aligned with how it works here in the US as well. The idea is literally, anything below 0 f is “fucking cold” and anything above 100f is “fucking hot”
sure, 80f is pretty damn warm, that’s how numbers work, they have a range. It’s not like there’s a distinct point where “hotness” begins and “coldness” ends
90f is generally pretty hot, but it’s mostly tolerable, you drink water, you’ll be fine, once you get into the 100f range, you start to run into accidental heat exhaustion heat stroke problems if you aren’t really on top of it.
below 0f, your nose hairs are basically guaranteed to be frozen, and any facial hair you have is probably going to get frozen over time as well.
It’s a heuristic, you’re not supposed to treat it as an ultimatum.
Fahrenheit is what that one German town’s lowest air temperature measured back in 1708.
If fahrenheit was what humans felt, then 50° would be room temperature.
This isn’t the case, because humans can handle significantly larger deviations from “comfortable” on the cold side than the hot side, so again Fahrenheit gets it pretty much right.
IT’S OVER THREE HUNDRED KELVIIIIIIIIIIN!
<img alt="" src="https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/8d33d6d2-3a31-403c-85c1-05524f8bc2c8.png">
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/533c475f-607e-45b1-9685-58619c911361.jpeg">
Strange, because it is bullshit.
Fahrenheit isn’t how people feel, otherwise 50° would be perfect temperature.
You Americans are just used to thinking in Fahrenheit, that is why you think it is how humans feel. As a European, I “feel” in Celsius.
50F is the perfect temperature.
That’s 10°C for those who want to judge you. And you’re wrong, the perfect temperature is 17°C. Not too cold, not too hot.
The correct rebuttal is that 69 degrees is ideal ambient temperature.
Rating inflation. If someone called you a 5 or 6 out of 10, you’d feel bad. 7/10 is the bottom of acceptability, just like 72° is room temperature.
That’s the most amount of copium I’ve seen on lemmy so far.
You think that’s some copium, watch this:
When you’re a child having a sick-day, you get to stay home from school and watch TV, which is absolutely 💯. What temperature do you need to have to get a sick-day? 100°
In foreign units, 100° is the temperature at which water boils. What has boiling water ever done for anyone? Literally nothing. But in freedom units, water boils at 212°. 212 is a palindrome and palindromes are so cool, they could be classified as 💯. As we all know, 100 is the coolest number, which is why that’s how high grades go.
Finally, using USA standards, calculating calories in food merely requires measuring how much energy is required to raise 3.5 oz water 1.8° F by burning the food and then dividing by 1000. Using your weird unpatriotic methods, you’d have to measure how much energy is required to raise 100 grams of water 1° C by burning the food and then not dividing by anything??? Sounds lame!
Someone give me a Gatorade, those mental gymnastics were a hell of a workout
Even better, I don’t even feel a fever until it’s 104°F. I’ve just looked it up, and that’s exactly 40°C. Even my body likes round centigrade numbers.
riddle me this then mr european man (i assume for the context of shitposting)
would you feel ok with getting half of everything you did being completely wrong, or would you feel ok with only three of those 10 things being completely wrong.
half is formidable, like you tried, probably. 7/10 is on the way to being good at it though.
I don’t understand this shitpost question.
it’s a question surrounding human bias on the subject of correctness. Most people would argue that 7/10 is “ok or good” where as most people would argue that 5/10 is “not the worst, but not good”
we’re not fundamentally biased to the midpoint of something, we’re fundamentally biased to the perceived average of something.
Fahrenheit literally meant to base the scale with 100 being human body temp.
It was later rescaled by Cavendish to put the freezing point of water at exactly 32 and boiling point at exactly 212, giving a nicely-divisible 180-degree separation between freezing and boiling. That shift is why body temperature is 98.6.
Horse* body temp
I’m pretty sure that wasn’t actually Fahrenheit’s intention, more a happy accident. Also if your body temp is 100°F then you’re running a mild/moderate fever.
The scale was adjusted later to make freezing and boiling points land on exact numbers with an easily-divisible 180-dregrees between them (180 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, 36, 45, 60, and 90).
archive.org/…/paper-doi-10_1098_rstl_1777_0038
I don’t usually run, but when I do, I run a mild/moderate fever.
I like this version better than “he had a fever when he measured 100 degrees” so I will choose to believe it without further research.
I hope you are correct.
archive.org/…/paper-doi-10_1098_rstl_1777_0038
Seems fancy and legit, I see no reason to actually read it and confirm the info.
Welcome to peer review!
I heard circular thermometers were how it was done then so he lined up 180° with 180°.
It literally was not.
I cited and linked my source from the 18th century when it was redefined. What’s yours?
Why would you pick 50 for the perfect temp? Genuinely curious why land on that number.
Because 0° is the minimum a body is supposed to endure according to the tweet, and 100° is the maximum a body should endure.
So the ideal temperature should be right in the middle.
But it isn’t, so Fahrenheit isn’t “how people feel”.
Why should the ideal temperature be right in the middle of the range?
It’s no surprise that the maximum end of the range is right around the body temperature, as it’s difficult for the body to keep itself cool once the environment is around or warmer than the body temperature. Sure, we can sweat, but that uses up a lot of water and people generally find that getting all sweaty to not be pleasant. Run out of water or raise the temperature too much and it gets dangerous pretty quickly.
On the other hand, if the environment is a lot cooler than the body temperature, then it is difficult for the body to keep warm. I’m sure for our distant ancestors who lived in what is now Africa, their minimum temperature was much higher, possibly putting the ideal temperature right around the middle of their range. Luckily for us, we have clothing and can put on more clothing to stay warm, which is how we can now make the minimum so low. But while we can use clothing to lower our minimum, we really don’t have anything different to raise our maximum vs. our ancestors - we’re both limited by how well we can cool ourselves by sweating. So for that reason it doesn’t really surprise me that our ideal temperature is towards the upper end of what we consider the minimum and maximum temperatures.
Because it is in the middle of that “0 is really really cold, 100 is really really hot” “human feeling” fahrenheit scale you guys keep going on about.
This is the first time I’ve heard about a “human feeling” scale so sure, 50 must be perfect.
As is typically responded to this ‘response’: there are a large number of people-many European-who would unironically say that 50°F (10°C) is, in fact, the ideal temperature.
They’re wrong, of course, but they exist.
But you’re also assuming that the exact middle of the range is where the ideal sweet spot should be. That’s wrong. People generally can better handle larger temperature deviations that are colder than their ideal than hotter deviations.
The difference is that humans emit their own heat. Combined with our funny tendency to wear insulative clothing that can asymptotically approach zero net heat exchange with the atmosphere, acceptable temperatures skew wildly towards and beyond freezing.
Meanwhile, without some kind of acting cooling mechanism, any temp even slightly above fever temp is inevitably fatal. You can only take off so many layers. What are you going to do, take off your skin? Sweating helps us humans a lot, but evaporative cooling can only do so much to reverse the heat gradient.
50 F is excellent… with a light jacket or a blanket. Not so much if you’re naked.
I love it when it’s 50ish out and sunny. You don’t get all sweaty, plus you can wear cozy socks and sweaters or just go out in short sleeves and both are perfectly fine. The bugs all start going into hiding at that temperature but the grass and leaves are still green
50 degrees is a damn good temperature. I won’t stand here and let you besmirch 50 degrees.
Its not the “perfect” temperature but what temp in celcius is “perfect”? What a ridiculously proposition that there’s a perfect temperature.
20 is perfect.
that’s pretty comfortable, but between 50 and 70f which is about 10 and 20 c is the “comfortable range”
As a European I can perfectly feel the 0 degree. I step outside and 5 seconds later I can tell you if it’s below zero or not.
For me “it’s now really hot” in summer is exactly when it’s over 30C. It being 86F doesn’t make any more sense. Approximately above 35C I will avoid going outside. Which would be 95F, not 100. From here, the temps in summer in the south of Europe are often around 100F at peak. Above or below doesn’t matter.
All that Fahrenheit scale is good for is if you live in a continental climate, more to the south, e.g. some useless place like Oklahoma, where 0F is approximately year low, and 100F is approximately year high.
For all other places, where the temperature delta over the course of the year is not as extreme, this Fahrenheit scale is as unintuitive as celcius, e.g. you just get used to it.
you guys need to stop converting directly between temperatures, you’re right at 86f, bump it up to 90f and woah, suddenly it’s actually a nice round number.
You’re too conversion pilled to realize that the human experience isn’t fundamentally and objectively representative. 1 degree celsius isn’t super noticeable, just like 5 degrees fahrenheit isn’t super noticeable either.
it is though? It’s like perfectly comfortable because you can dress up just enough to where you’re actually wearing a decent bit of clothing, but you can also dress down to a pretty light set of clothing as well.
This is also ignoring that this is both, arbitrary, and also completely subjective to the person.
The human body might end up liking 70f more than 50f, purely because it’s 96f inside the body, so something lower to allow heat transfer, but not low enough to be physically uncomfortable would be more expected.
Actually, here’s a good question, why do you land on the 50f point? Are you expecting the middle to be the most optimal point of perfection? Or is this just a metric brain thing?
Fahrenheit is literally a German dude making a scale from, “scheiße its chilly outside” to “oh mein gott, its hot out!”
Yeah. But Celsius refers to inside room temperatures. 0°C = yay, ice skating! 100°C = yay, sauna!
What annoys me about that phrasing, is that “how water feels” is quite relevant to how humans feel.
The obvious example is that if it’s below 0°C, it starts freezing, which causes slippery sidewalks, snow, dry air, all that stuff.
But just in general having a feeling how much water will evaporate and later precipitate at certain temperatures, and even stuff like how hot beverages and cooking temperatures are, it’s all still relevant for humans…
that’s an interesting idea, BUT, the boiling point for water also exists under f as well, it’s just 212 f, which if you want to round for convenience, is 200f. 100f is just about half the boiling point of water.
I guess you celsius folks might be more water pilled than the average US citizen, but it’s not like it’s impossible.
In Celcius water boils at exactly 100°C, and you don’t have to round, and 50°C is exactly half the boiling point of water.
Yes, Celsius users are waterpilled: the whole system is based on the temperature at which water freezes and evaporates at 1 atm pressure.
(You’re just fucking with us right? Like Celsius is has a coarser base unit, and the range applicable to human temperatures are not such pretty numbers, but you can’t be seriously thinking Fahrenheit makes more sense for when we talk about water?)
unless you’re doing literal chemistry, the specific boiling point of the water doesn’t matter, especially for any subjective referential experiences you might have, such as, going outside.
i’m not saying it’s better, i’m just saying you’re having a failure of imagination to conceptualize the usage of the fahrenheit system if you so pleased to use it in such a specific manner, which almost nobody here does. You could still do it though.
Cooking is basically water based chemistry, so it makes a lot of sense to use Celsius.
idk man, there’s a lot of temperatures in cooking that are like, kind of close? Not that close, but like, kind of close. Even then, the one case where i consider it genuinely mattering is boiling water which like, you can just kinda know.
Your scale in water terms starts at 32. 100 is nowhere near halfway between 32 and 212
the celsius scale literally covers 55% of the range of the fahrenheit scale. I’d say “about half” is perfectly reasonable.
granted, it skews since you’re starting on the low end. The figure is more like 122f right in the middle, which is, not great, but i wasn’t going to calculate the half boiling point as i’ve literally never seen it be relevant anywhere lol.
Celcius degrees are quite a bit larger than Fahrenheit degrees. 0 to 100C is much larger than 0 to 100F so I don’t get what you mean by Celcius covering about half of Fahrenheit. In any case neither scale runs out of numbers high or low
my main point was that accuracy matters a lot less with fahrenheit, because it’s so much broader. a range of about 10 degrees fahrenheit is the average subjectively experienced “change” in temperature, at least on the higher end, where there’s more difference between the individual numbers. On the cold side there’s a lot less variance as it meets at about -40 in both systems.
this is very true though, hard to run out of numbers when you can just make more up, although there is an ultimate limit in either direction, due to what temperature actually measures. That’s a physics thing though.
The words you are looking for are that Fahrenheit is more precise. But it’s not as there are an infinity of numbers between any two integers.
My thermometer at work which I use for health and safety stuff reports temperature to two decimal places. Had we wanted more precision we could have gone with twenty decimal places. In too big or too small metric units we use multipliers - metres are too small for long distances so we use kilometres (thousands of metres), metres are too big for construction so we use millimetres (thousandths of metres)
Where Celcius degrees are too big, people (scientists, since whole degrees or a single decimal is enough for everyone else) use milikelvins
yeah and you could make a temperature scale call it fuckwit and make water freeze at -1, and water room temperature at 0, and then make it boil at 1. I don’t know why you would want to do that though.
well you wouldn’t go with twenty decimal spaces because after you get past about 4 decimals, it starts to become inconsequential, and you should really just use sci no anyway.
fascinating that you propose this, because this is literally the opposite of what i said lol.
Humans are mostly water. If water boils, then humans will mostly boil too.
Temperature doesn’t care about your feelings.
Oh, how rude.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/972e9c26-6ab7-4a98-a4f0-10bf855c1883.jpeg">
Their friend is a dumbass though.
EDIT: replied to wrong comment
I think the reason people are saying that Fahrenheit “feels” right is because we use a base 10 number system. 1-10 and 0%-100% feel right to us because of this. If you somehow knew nothing about each temperature unit, but you did know base 10, I feel like Fahrenheit would be more intuitive. Obviously if you grew up with Celsius that would feel normal.
Disclaimer: I feel like the US needs to adopt metric already. It’s so much better.
Use the same logic to use km/h then.
0 to 100 is better than 0 to 60.
60mph/97kmh is not that fast, though. 90mph/157kmh is pretty fast.
Would it though? Because it’s not like people who didn’t grew up with Fahrenheit can just intuitively use and interpret it. Maybe base ten is “more intuitive”, but I’d argue not to any meaningful degree. Both scales have to be explained, experienced, and tied to personal reference points.
What? 100°F is too mild. It doesn’t even boil water!
mild in what way? Do you live in death valley??? Have you ever experienced 100f? You can literally get heat exhaustion, and heat stroke from temperatures of 110f pretty easily if you aren’t watching yourself, we remind ourselves of this constantly anytime it gets hot.
They are referring to the fact that 100 celsius literally boils water.
is that literally the entire joke?
It doesn’t even boil water.
It’s slightly above my core body temperature. So yes, literally I experience it all the time.
Sauna. It’s literally boiled water. And it’s pretty safe for average human.
yeah and? Last i checked i’m not a pot of water.
to be clear, it’s not slightly above, it’s high enough that you’re getting into fever range, a few degrees over that and it starts to become deadly. 105f internal temp is potentially fatal so.
the average body temperature ranges about 2 degree fahrenheit. 97f to 99f that’s about the entire extent of that. 100F specifically is slightly over that in terms of general temperature experience.
thank god, i was about to do hard labor in a sauna. Not to mention this is also a sauna, not direct infrared and UV exposure to direct sunlight. Not to mention the literal temperature of the environment around it, and the indirect reflected heating that you’ll receive.
guess i should now argue that cold temperatures aren’t dangerous because people do ice baths regularly.
When you use Celsius from birth 41C does make you say FORTY ONE DEGREES?!!!
100%
It’s just Americans having American perspectives promoted as world views.
It’s about crossing into triple digits, a new order of magnitude, it feels heavy.
… for you.
But it’s also underwhelming when your usual reference for over 100 is, “WHAT IT’S HOT ENOUGH TO BOIL WATER OUTSIDE!?”
American: IT’S A HUNDRED AND SEVEN DEGREES OUTSIDE
Civilized people: no it fucking ain’t, you overdramatic princess
It doesn’t really though for people who doesn’t use fahrenheit.
brother, that’s what a world view is lmao, do you not understand this concept?
Most of us don’t really go anywhere outside of the US, the entire continental US is the literal equivalent of the collective EU. What do you want me to say? I literally don’t need to leave to US to experience something geographically unique.
I think they’ve meant world’s view, not worldview
im pretty sure the world’s view would be that we’re parasites destroying the well balanced nature of the ecology of the earth, but that’s just me.
Geographically perhaps. But the cultural and historical unique is something you are going to miss out on by staying inside your own home country for your entire life. You think your US regional differences are the same as the differences between two countries, but anyone who has experienced different countries will tell you in an instant that that is not so.
i mean culturally in terms of outside of the continental US sure. There’s plenty of interesting and unique culture within the US if you just go looking for it. Though a lot of it is going to be somewhat westernized in essence. If you want more eastern culture, obviously you’re going to have to go farther east, but i feel like that’s a given.
On the other hand, if it was 107°C outside, the outrage would be so much more justified.
But much less vocal.
You know, because we’d all be dead.
Yeah, but it hits different. Smaller number is smaller.
That’s why I use Kelvin. THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN DEGREES?!!
Should use Rankine with that logic. It comes out to 566.
Degrees? While using Kelvin?? OP is a phony!
I’d excuse it as part of the joke
Why not Centikelvin?
THIRTY ONE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED CENTIKELVIN??!!!
Who is kelvin and why the fuck are his numbers so large
No, he’s right. The “one hundred” part really does add certain powers, Austin Powers
It’s that extra “one” of incredulity.
40 degrees, that’s just too hot.
41? You’ve got to be fucking kidding me.
In Australia we go with “Farkin hot”
I’m gonna be honest. I love Celsius for the the whole perfect math reasons with calories and water based measurement…
But the curve on temps is a pain when all the nice temperatures require using a decimal place to decide just how slightly above or below pleasant it is but cold is basically everything from 16°C to -30°C And then decimals really matter when hotter than pleasant temps.
Whole rounded integers are just so vastly different depending how high or low you are in Celsius.
I don’t know man, I’ve lived my entire life in a country that only uses Celsius and I’ve never seen a single place or person using decimals to display temperature we always use whole numbers.
I get your point but the difference in 1 degree in Celsius is still very insignificant to the point we don’t really need decimals at all.
I’ve been all over the world. Trust me seeing 21.6 or other decimals is not uncommon you and others are really just pushing hard on the ideas that there is no flaws and none of the quirks of Celsius.
I literally just set an air conditioner to 20.5°C. I don’t get why lie like this.
The reason you see fractions is BECAUSE of Fahrenheit. Your air conditioner is designed to work in multiple regions and so it works on steps. Easier to just map the half steps to Fahrenheit degrees and call it a day.
For non-electronic usage, people just say the round number.
No this was an airconditioner built for and used in Japan only. It’s only in Celsius. It just uses decimal point options for finer control. I have been in plenty of places that only use Celsius and use decimals especially higher than 20s.
And still doesn’t change the drastic change between the whole numbers the higher you go vs lower temps.
Edit: literally my fever thermometer uses decimals to help you get a proper temperature reading between normal and fever.
Whatever it was it was intended for it was built in China for a global audience, then customized for whatever market it was sold in. They all use common software platforms.
It does indeed change that fact, because temperature is exclusively reported in whole numbers. Go to any weather channel, site, provider, etc. It’s always whole numbers, even in Celsius.
It truly doesn’t matter.
Sure the thermometer is the one place I remember decimals, but I can guarantee you no one I’ve ever met in my life knows the difference between 25 and 26 degrees celsius, much less decimals of it.
Specially air conditioners, they all have arrows to go up and down the temperature, you’re literally just speaking from a very specific experience of one special air conditioner that had more control than most others.
Huh, I can only speak from my experience. I have a couple of thermometers in my room that give decimals, but my air con doesn’t give decimal options and the government meteorological service doesn’t either. I certainly don’t think I can tell the difference between 39 and 39.2.
That’s a really weird one, every apartment I’ve lived at the air conditioner only displays the temperature in integers and I’m 100% sure of that because every each one of them had arrows to change the temperature up or down in one unit.
Meh I’m about 50/50 4 air conditioners in. Half degrees has not been all that uncommon and it’s up and down arrows to adjust it. I don’t get the handwaving of legitimate points of comtention to make Celsius seem more perfect. Everything has its flaws. It’s completely fine to admit that.
That’s not the point, I haven’t said Celsius is perfect not a single time here, I’m just calling your BS because you said decimals matter for us which is not true because no one that lives in a country that uses Celsius knows the difference a decimal makes, I honestly think we just really feel some difference at like 2 degrees in variation, far from decimals.
Decimals don’t matter for you and you are pushing that to everyone as a way to delegitimize my point.
I use Celsius and they matter to me. I can and do notice a difference between setting my thermostat to 21.5 vs 22 vs 22.5. You don’t whatever.
I said I was using Celsius but because I had a complaint you decided I was outside of your accepted user group and my statement was BS.
Its bullshit.
Yeah your point is BS, because you really don’t need decimals to do most things. Good for you that you can notice decimals in difference but that’s not a normal thing, most weather forecast only say the integer, most air conditioners (all as far as I’ve seen) tell the temperature in integer, if you talk to someone else about the weather we also talk in integer.
YOU should stop pushing the idea that decimals are important into everyone else as if they are true for everyone, because they’re not.
My thermostat increments by 0.5c
My digital thermometers all uses decimals.
good point, but to us Celsius fans or “Celsilovers” over one hundred sounds like the apocalypse.
Which is the closest thing to a legitimate criticism of celcius that exists. The entire top half of the scale (everything over ~50°, that is) is pretty much useless as far as judging the weather is concerned.
Top half? 0-50°C is the top half. The bottom half is -50-0°C.
And 0-50° is middle half😎
yes, that part is for cooking
I am being forced to learn celsius by my non American friends. Call me an incelsius.
FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED MILLICELCIUS?!
For proof that this thread is just people justifying what they know as better somehow, look no further than Canada.
We do cooking temps in Fahrenheit, weather in Celsius. Human weights in pounds, but never pounds and oz. Food weights in grams, cooking weights in pounds and oz. Liquid volume in millilitres and litres, but cooking in cups, teaspoons and tablespoons. Speed & distance in kilometres, heights in feet and inches.
Try and give this any consistency and people will look at you like you’re fucked. The next town is 100km over, I’m 5ft 10in, a can of soda is 355ml, it’s 21c out and I have the oven roasting something at 400f. Tell me it’s 68f out and I will fight you.
People like what they are used to, and will bend over backwards to justify it. This becomes blatantly obvious when you use a random mix of units like we do, because you realize that all that matters is mental scale.
If Fahrenheit is “how people feel” then why are feet useful measurements of height when 90% of people are between 4ft and 6ft? They aren’t. You just know the scale in your head, so when someone says they’re 7ft tall you say “dang that’s tall”. That’s it.
This makes a lot of sense, and why I’d never survive in Canada.
Those are two different things. Hope this helps.
It doesn’t help at all, it’s being intentionally obtuse. You know what I mean, it’s unhelpful to pretend otherwise and pick a fight over it.
If an argument is being made for one thing, Fahrenheit, it’s not relevant to bring up a different thing. Why is feet a useful measurement? Maybe it’s not, we’re talking about temperature.
Yeah like the metric system has good arguments for why it’s measurements and weights are better, mainly conversion being easier, but for temperature there really isn’t an argument. I would make an argument for Fahrenheit as it gives more precision without having to use decimals which at least in America isn’t a thing for temperature. But those are pretty minor things and I do tend to agree it comes down to what you grew up with.
This fear of decimals is a strictly American thing. Celsius achieves more precision with decimals than fahrenheit without decimals. And this American fear of decimals is pretty funny, considering you will happily do advanced fractions as soon as you are doing length measurements.
I don’t mind decimals at all, it’s more that I don’t trust companies to actually deal with supporting decimals when making the switch. Plus the last time I discussed this on Lemmy someone was saying that decimals aren’t even universally used and it might depend on what you get whether you get that precision or not. Either way like the main point of my post was anyways these are minor arguments and at the end of the day there isn’t really a reason to use Celsius vs Fahrenheit.
Can you feel the difference between 23.5° and 24? I can’t. You don’t often need precision to tenths.
In Australia most weather providers give you whole degrees, the bureau of meteorology gives you to one decimal in reports and whole degrees in forecasts
My coffee and beer boilers can hit high precision temperatures to variously 0.1° or 0.5° precision. The beer boiler gives 3 digits - hundredths below 10°, tenths below 100°, whole numbers 100° and over
You can choose the precision of thermometers you wish to buy for yourself
I have seen fahrenheit thermometers which are hard to read to better precision than 5 degrees
1cm3 of water weights 1 gr and needs 1 calorie to rise 1ºC.
But calories are now obsolete and the unit is Joules.
i still don’t see how this is intentionally obtuse, feet are a mid point between inches and yards, it just makes sense to break down things over a certain amount to a much more palatable scale. Everyone knows roughly what 1 ft is, and everyone knows roughly what 1 inch is. Paired together you can get a pretty rough and accurate guesstimate of height. I feel like it’s also pretty expected for it to be within the range of 4-6 ft. Most people don’t really measure feet outside of that range, unless you’re doing construction.
humans are a comparatively arbitrary height so i feel like you’re just complaining about the height of humans being weirdly arbitrary? Out of all the systems you could use for height, ft and in is pretty well tuned to the human nature, you’re not gonna do much better.
Fahrenheit: let’s use “really cold weather” as zero and “really hot weather” as 100.
Celsius: let’s use “freezing water” as zero, and “boiling water” as 100.
Canucks: <img alt="" src="https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/2e522b40-889b-48db-8ccd-39e5eacf1dcd.png">
Celsius is for scientists and nerds, Fahrenheit is for normal idiots. It’s not rocket surgery.
I don’t really have a horse in this race but this logic doesn’t seem legit to me.
How is -17°C really cold weather AND 37°C really hot weather?
One is actively trying to kill you if weren’t already dead by the time the weather got that bad. The other just makes your nuts stick to your thighs – if you’re in a humid place.
I’d agree with the logic if 100F was equal to something like 65°C. 🤷♂️
Thank you. That argument bugs the heck out of me.
maybe it’s a climate thing? Where do you live, here in ameica it’s quite literally the best way to describe it. We see swings below 0f at the coldest parts of the year, and upwards of 100+ in the hottest parts of the year.
So why not make the temperature go to the hottest? Let me guess, 0 isn’t the coldest either in America, right? It’s just so arbitrary, and pure cope to say it’s the best way to describe temperature.
why not make it more arbitrary? Why not leave metric rules and use something like twelve that has fractions? Because it’s nice. It’s pleasing having it be 0f and 100f, it’s a clean range, and it’s also pretty comprehensive in terms of the temperature variance.
It just happens to work out pretty nicely.
You’re literally just applying the anti-thesis of the metric system to the question, and asking me why we don’t do it that way, idk what you’re expecting me to say here.
do celsius users not consider something like -20c to be “pretty cold” and 40c to be “pretty hot” That’s equally as arbitrary.
All of them are. The decision to use water at all is completely arbitrary. Even Kelvin and Rankine are completely arbitrary: the “width” of the degrees is not defined by a physical factor, but relative to an entirely arbitrary concept.
Technically all arbitrary, but Fahrenheit is definitely on a whole different level of arbitrary.
Celsius - 0 = precise freezing point of water and 100 = precise boiling point
Kelvin - same as C, but shifted so 0 is the precise lowest possible temperature
Fahrenheit - 0 is the imprecise freezing point of some random brine mixture, 100 is the imprecise average body temperature of the developer
That’s a myth. It’s no more true than the myth that it was the body temperature of horses, or that the scale was designed to reflect how humans experience the weather. (It happens to reflect how humans experience the weather, but this was an incidental characteristic and not the purpose for which the scale was designed.)
The Fahrenheit scale starts to make sense when you realize he was a geometrist. It turns out that a base-10 system of angular measurement objectively sucks ass, so the developer wasn’t particularly interested geometrically irrelevant numbers like “100”, but in geometrically interesting numbers like “180”. He put 180 degrees between the freezing and boiling points of water. (212F - 32F = 180F)
After settling on the “width” of his degree, he measured down to a repeatable origin point, which happened to be 32 of his degrees below the freezing point of water. He wanted a dial thermometer to point straight down in ice water, straight up in boiling water, and to use the same angular degrees as a protractor.
The calibration point he chose wasn’t the “freezing point” of the “random brine mixture”. The brine was water, ice, and ammonium chloride, which together form a frigorific mixture due to the phase change of the water. As the mixture is cooled, it resists getting colder than 0F due to the phase change of the water to ice. As it is warmed, it resists getting warmer than 0F due to the phase change of ice to water. (Obviously, it can’t maintain this relationship indefinitely. But so long as there is ice and liquid brine, the brine will maintain this temperature.) This makes it repeatable, in labs around the world.
And it wasn’t a “random” brine mixture: it was the coldest and most stable frigorific mixture known to the scientific community.
This criticism of Fahrenheit is borne of simple ignorance: people don’t understand how or why it was developed, and assume he was an idiot. He wasn’t. He had very good reasons for his choices.
That was a long way of saying what I said, you just don’t see faranheit as ludicrously out of date, while I (and most of the world) do. Live your life as you wish friend. It’s a random brine mixture. Maybe it was less random back then, but now it’s an arbitrary mixture of water and salts in arbitrary ratios. Deal with it. Fahrenheit sucks.
Every measurement system has had its formal definition changed several times. The kilogram, for example, was once formally defined as the mass of a specific block of metal in France, which was later determined to be losing mass, and thus made a pretty terrible standard. Now, the kilogram is formally defined in terms of the meter and the Planck Constant.
Celsius was once defined by the freezing and boiling points of water, but those aren’t actually constant: Fahrenheit’s brine mixture is actually significantly more consistent. Kelvin’s degree spacing comes from that definition of Celsius, but it it was eventually redefined to be more precise by using the triple point of water: pure water at a specific pressure and temperature where it can simultaneously exist as solid, liquid, and gas. Significantly more accurate, but not enough: Kelvin was redefined in 2019 in terms of joules, which are in turn defined by kg, m, s, which are ultimately defined in terms of the Planck constant.
Celsius is now formally defined in terms of Kelvin. Fahrenheit is also formally defined in terms of Kelvin. Fahrenheit’s brine story is just a piece of trivia.
We live on a water planet. The weather we care about is water.
If you look at the overnight low you probably want to know if frost was likely. Guess what Celcius temperature frost happens at.
That factoid makes celsius relevant for about 4 out of the 12 months, and humans lack the capacity to distinguish between 60-100 on the Celsius scale. Anything at those temperatures just feels like blisters.
The high end of 0 to 100 is nice for boiling, when I’m making beer at the boiling stage the number on the scale goes from somewhere below 25 to 100 and so the end point is obvious
We boil water quite a lot, though we often aren’t tracking the temperature
Most of the time the temperature scale that’s best is the one you know. I don’t know of any case where Fahrenheit is objectively best (like Celcius is when water is involved) but I think the best argument for Celcius is it is used in science, so American scientists start a step behind all the others by having to learn a new system. Given neither have any great advantage I reckon it’s worth America changing to make things better for American scientists
The records are -80°F and 134°F
That’s quite an error in a “whole human experience in zero to one hundred” system
It makes no sense because that’s not what the 0 of the Fahrenheit scale is. The 0 point is the coldest an ammonium chloride brine mixture can be cooled to. The 90 point was an estimated average for human body temperature (it was adjusted up over time). These were chosen because the goal of the scale was to provide a way for people to have a defined temperature scale with a range and degree size that could be reliably reproduced without passing around standardized tools. 100 is really hot because human bodies were used as a reference for the high end, but the low end has nothing to do with the human body.
Geometric construction plays a role in there as well: the 180 degrees between the boiling point and the freezing point of water was not accidental.
but like isn’t that the whole point of celsius? all you need to calibrate a C thermometer is some water: when it starts freezing it’s 0°C and when it’s boiling it’s 100°C, super simple and accessible.
It’s not like “the estimated average human body temperature” is particularly accurate, and surely no matter what you mix into water it won’t magically boil at the same temperature regardless of air pressure?
You’re totally correct that Celsius is the more sensible scale with easier to replicate reference points (when using water). It was also invented almost 30 years after the Fahrenheit scale and with all the insights gained from that period of technological advancement. In fact in the modern day the Celsius degree size is defined in reference to the Boltzmann constant since Celsius is essentially the Kelvin scale with the numbers moved around.
It also used 100 as the freezing point of water and 0 as the boiling point when originally proposed, which changed after Anders Celsius died because everyone knew that was a weird way to do it.
At what molar concentration? Was it just as much NH4Cl as he could dissolve at ambient temperature and pressure?
As I understand it, yes it was a saturated solution.
0f is pretty fucking cold outside, your nose hairs start to freeze in this weather. It’s genuinely uncomfortable and you can die pretty easily if you aren’t prepared for it. 100f is similar, anything over 100f and you start to get into straight heat exhaustion and potential heat stroke region of danger. it’s really not that bad? Sure if you’re like, standing outside doing nothing in the shade, you’ll be fine, but do some labor and you might meet the fabled heat exhaustion fairy.
Obviously, when you convert it to celsius, it seems really fucking weird, That’s pretty normal for conversions though. Like just to be clear, if you round these numbers, they make more sense. -20 c and “damn it’s really cold out” you round up to 40c and “damn it’s really hot out”
also im not really sure what you’re trying to say, but 0f isn’t like, going to kill you kill you, it’s not pleasant, but in the right attire you’ll be fine. -20 f and you start getting closer, -40f and you really start having to think about it. Are you aussie or something? This scale seems really shifted up to me. “nuts sticking weather” is like 80f and humid here.
I’m saying that 0F is waaaaaaay more dangerous than 100F so the logic of those particular temperatures being the 0-100 ends of the scale can’t be explained by how dangerous they each are.
Almost everyone would be fine staying outside for 30 minutes at 100F without no external help (shade, cool drinks etc). Almost nobody would be fine after staying outside at 0F without external help (parka, thermals etc).
To me, with absolutely no data, it feels lie:
So calling 0F and 100F both “really dangerous” and using that to justify them being the respective points of 0 and 100 disingenuous. Like, use Fahrenheit if that’s what you’re used to - I use it too because that’s what I’m used to. But I don’t explain the insane system with “it’s because the two ends are reallllly dangerous.”
idk about that though, i mean maybe if you go outside completely naked, sure. But idk who would be doing that. I’ve regularly been outside in close to 0f temperature in lighter clothing, it’s not pleasant, but im not going to freeze to death within twenty minutes. Plus you can also do physical activity, and as long as you regulate sweat, you’ll be fine. Although sweat can be particularly dangerous in colder weather.
i think that’s unreasonable though, you just wouldn’t be going outside at all in those clothes, in the same way that you wouldn’t go outside in 100f weather in a full winter get up. You would literally die.
140f as a relative measure is wild to me, in 140f if you’re outside without an air conditioned vehicle (death valley) and you don’t have water you will die within about a day. 100-130f is considered “extreme heat” in death valley, which has a website that you can pull up for some relevant information. Once your body is over about 110f internal temperature, you’re fucking dead. Unless you have a way to either redirect sunlight from hitting you, and water to replenish that lost from sweat, you die really quickly.
0f isn’t considered “extreme cold” that would be something like -40c (or f, they’re the same) where basically everything starts to freeze, and i’ve seen people do overnight camping in that weather. It’s perfectly doable, obviously not without gear, but who isn’t bringing gear? Hell you can bring a space blanket with you, with the right gear you can easily exist in 0f weather for a prolonged period.
I’m not sure where you’re quoting the “really dangerous” from because i just said both of them are “really hot/cold”
did i say this anywhere??? I feel like i’m schizophrenic.
Every time a heat wave brings 100F, the news starts reporting about old people dying. Every time the temperatures reach zero, same thing.
Personally, I can handle the cold much easier than the heat. I get stupid-brain working more than 30 minutes at 95F. Another 15 minutes and I can’t catch my breath, lose fine motor control, and start feeling faint. Drenching myself in water - the colder the better - every 20 minutes or so is the only way I’ve found to be productive above 100F. I feel like 100F is actively trying to kill me.
0F is where it starts getting difficult for me to stay warm without an additional heat source.
Lmao are you a penguin or something? Please tell me that you’re exaggerating to make a point and aren’t seriously saying that you’re capable of staying warm at -10°C (14°F) “without an additional heat source.”
I mean, I have clothes. Long underwear? Layers? Coats, gloves, hats, scarves?
They say you can always put on more clothes if you’re cold, but that’s not really true. Insulation adds bulk, and bulk reduces mobility. Around 0F is where I start to have real trouble wearing enough clothing to stay warm while still being able to perform the activity that has me outside in that weather. Somewhere around 0F, clothing doesn’t really cut it, and I need shelter or additional heat.
That’s a lot of moved goalposts to justify the weird temperature scale logic but okay.
You’ve essentially justified that 0F and 100F are what they are because some old people died when it was 100F (most people, including the old are perfectly fine at this temperature all around the world) and because you can manage at 0F while wearing a ton of layers and not need a heat source (do all old people manage to survive just fine at 10F or 20F by just putting on some layers?).
Either way, this pointless conversation had gone on for way too long. Have a good day! :)
to be clear, we use feet and inches, and there is historical precedent for breaking things down once they get past a certain grouping, we only have 10 fingers after all. To me the difference between 200cm and 220 is literally fuck all. You ask me the difference between 4 ft and 6ft and i can pretty quickly tell you.
I find it weird that when measuring height in metric, people using cm exclusively, i’ve noticed this a lot actually, people will use cm or mm in places where it arguably doesn’t make any sense. I could see the justification for doing math maybe, but like, that defeats the whole point of it being metric no?
Shouldn’t you be using meters and cm for height specifically? Since most people are a good bit over one meter i feel like it would make sense to do it that way. But then again that’s just kind of a shit bucket worth of options you have, ideally you would use decimeters, but nobody uses those things for some reason.
Most of Europe just uses metres for people’s height. 1.67m, like that. I have no mental picture of that, so it doesn’t work for me. But they don’t seem to have any trouble, further evidence that it’s all just what you know.
hm, that’s weird, i’ve seen this first hand in a handful of cases, guess i just get the weird ones. Granted i still see it holding true in things like construction, where i guess it makes more sense, but it seems weirdly arbitrary to me.
Why is that defeating the whole point of being metric? If you know someone is 183 cm tall, you also know that they are 1.83 m tall. If its easier to say the length in cm, you do. No need for “one meter and eighty-three centimeters” or “one point eighty-three meters”, just “a hundred and eighty-three centimeters”. Often you just skip saying the “centimeters” part as well, because most people can see that you’re not the size of a skyscraper without getting a ruler out.
yeah idk, i guess it’s just weird to me, because here in the us if you measured someones height in inches alone, you would be chased out of a room. We strictly use feet and inches, and then yards if referring to a more “broad” range. So you can very safely assume something is in feet and inches if its just two numbers stuck together.
I feel like i could very easily get confused with metric if i’m not running a consistent rule for default units. Seems like an easy way to get a random x10 error in there to me.
As you pointed out previously, nobody uses decimeters, so x10 errors are not that common.
i’m just gonna say that the joke here is that it was a 10x error. But that’s retroactive, so.
To you. But you are aware that this is not the case for people (almost the rest of the world) who are using metric, right?
i mean i would assume so. But i have no direct reference to what 200cm is other than it’s somewhere about 6ft or 2 yards. something like 6’ 5" i think. I would need to know the height of like 50 other people to be able to make a relative distinction there.
Imagine weighing people as big rocks, though.
Until the UK changes that, us Americans and Canadians can rest assured that nothing we are doing is quite that ridiculous.
Outdoor temperature in °C, unless you’re talking about an outdoor pool then it’s often enough °F :-)
I think part of the reasons it’s so mixed might just be due to how many Amero-centric devices and parts are common between the two countries.
Y’all can take your shitty Phillips screws though. Roberts is by far superior ;-)
As a Canadian idk why your using us an an example, we are wrong to do so and we blame Americans for giving us this bad habit.
I just see it positively and choose to believe you’re in the process of transitioning to enlightenment (metric). ;)
Note to self: High heat levels make Canadians cranky.
The real reason Fahrenheit will never die!
youtu.be/nROK4cjQVXM
(Finnemore’s conversation between Farenheit and Celsius)
celsius is the yelp of temperature ratings
Sounds like a great time to propose my system of temperature: Super Celsius. I’ll connect it to the freezing and boiling points of water just like Celsius, but while freezing remains at 0, boiling is now 1000. Get ready for a nice mild day of 250.
Kilocelsius
CentiCelsius I think (10 cm in 1 m). kilo would go the other way. love this idea though
I believe it’s DeciCelsius. I don’t know in what system 1 meter contains only 10 centimeters heh, thought it’s 100.
Haha, i knew kilo was wrong but someone would figure it out. Not sure how i confused myself that badly
Centi = 1e-2, deci = 1e-1
Regards,
Non-American
decicelsisus. It would only be 0.1kC when water is boiling. That’s not very fun.
Milicelsius = 0.001ºC
Kilocelsius = 1000ºC
I’m kilosweating
That’s overboard; You’re fine just multiplying your Celsius by 2.75.
And kelvin is just -273
we could use the freezing and boiling points of humans, for a change
Finally, change I can believe in
but is that dead or (at least recently) alive humans? for dead humans that’s about the same as just straight up water isn’t it?
Lets ditch base10 entirely and use 0(freezing)-216(boiling). that means 0-1000 in base6.
No, we should go back to the ancientBabylonian base-60 system. So a chilly 30°F day would be ⟨⟨⟨°B (B for Babylonian) and a scorching 100°F is ||-°B, or ↓↓→°B if you like. There’s not really a solid way to write cuneiform on a cell phone keyboard.
You’re saying this one goes up to eleven ?
By that logic, Americans should use km/h instead of mph. Going 0-100 is much better than 0-60. For the same reason you keep telling us why Fahrenheit is so much more intuitive.
You can go 100 mph
You can also go 107 Celsius, for a while.
You guys have a lot of Max 100 zones?
Because in km/h, we got lots of those
Also you calculate acceleration using 0-100 mph?
I didn’t say it was legal.
I think the highest speed limit I have seen in America is 85mph, which is around 135km/h. Typical highway speed limits though are 65mph, but everyone goes 5-10 over (105-120km/h).
The nice thing about mph is the whole mile a minute at 60mph. Makes it easy to mentally estimate time of arrival.
I mean… 100km/h is 100 km in one hour, it’s still useful to estimate a far arrival.
And 120 kph is 2 km per minute.
Do police not arrest people for this?
Depends on the city. Some cities are notorious for using speed traps to increase revenue.
Some places are sticklers about the speed limit, and other minor offenses. If you’re local, you tend to know where they are, either from word-of-mouth or local news. Most places won’t ticket for going 5 mph over because a lot of judges will just throw the ticket out, especially if you come with a receipt saying you had your speedometer calibrated. In seemingly more and more places, 10 mph over is the norm. Some of that’s due to shrinking police forces. Pretty much everywhere, 20+ mph over is considered reckless driving.
What part of the country are you from? IME that’s far from universal. I have gotten pulled for 20+ over in multiple states and it’s often just a warning, if I do get ticketed it’s just a ticket and that’s the end of it:
When I had first gotten my license in CA I got pulled over while doing 105-110 in a 65 mph zone. The cop wrote it up for 99 mph, which was a simple speeding ticket without the option for traffic school. I went to court and the judge knocked it down to a <$200 ticket with traffic school so I didn’t get any points on my record.
85 mph in a 65 is normal in a ton of states, they’d be they’d be writing up people for reckless driving in every other traffic stop if 20 over were the threshold.
Just because they don’t ticket you for it, doesn’t mean it isn’t legally considered reckless. Cops often exercise a bit of discretion when deciding which ticket, if any, to write up. Some people just get out of tickets. I’ve never been that lucky, and I’ve never really driven particularly fast. A quick search suggests reckless is considered 15-over in CA, but I can’t find the specific statute.
To answer your question, I’ve lived all up and down the east coast and TX.
The only threshold that will automatically get you a reckless driving violation in CA is over 100 mph
Texas has no defined speed threshold
Alabama, where I lived previously on the east coast, has no defined threshold
The guideline for officers in CO is to consider a reckless driving ticket at 26 over the limit and above
I could keep searching individual states but I guess my point is there are many states where 20 over is pretty much a common thing among drivers and not typically punishable with a reckless driving charge. I haven’t spent much time in the northeast, perhaps things are different there.
Lol no, you have to be going something like double the speed limit most places to get arrested
You might get a ticket, but almost any judge will throw the ticket out if they write you up for going 5-10 over. Some places will write the ticket anyways in the hopes of making some extra revenue, but generally speaking it’s not a ticket that is worth writing because it’s so easy to get tossed out.
Arrest no, ticket maybe. Depends on lots of things, like the road and expected speed, is it a neighborhood, school, or empty highway. how the officer is feeling. surrounding traffic speed. Also I think the ticket doubles or goes up in price 10+ mph over the limit.
Highest I have driven on is 130km/h, but it has no speed enforcement.
I think the more common measurement is 0-60 mph, so maybe thats closer to 1-100 in kilometers per hour.
That’s my point.
.
Actually, it’s the other way around. 100 degrees F weather is really hot. Driving 100 MPH is really fast.
In metric we have 40 degrees C weather is really hot, and driving…uhhh… (gets out a calculator)… 160 km/h is really fast.
Uhh and 100 ° C is also really hot.
Plus, 100 km/h is also pretty fast.
100°C is where you shouldn’t touch it anymore and 100 to 120 km/h is the speed limit about everywhere except germany.
100mph is like, actually kinda spooky though. 100 kmh isn’t spooky. Also 60mph ties nicely into the seconds/minutes/hours time dichotomy, which is fun.
TWO HUNDRED AND SEVETY THREE KELVIN I’M FREEZING
this is so true, but the thing the celsiouds won’t understand, that the farenheitoids haven’t realized, is that the celsius users die (not literally) in heat of about 85 f which for any fahrenheit user is, literally a nice summer day.
EDIT: i’m making a joke about the UK heat waves, since people don’t seem to realize that.
It has LAYERS!
Humidity plays a big part of that I think. Like, don’t older folks start dropping in England around 85-90f because of the humidity there? In Phoenix 107 sucks hard, but it’s dry so you can still effectively cool off.
the humidity certainly doesn’t help, but believe it or not, it gets humid here in the US too. We get high humidity 85f days out here, if you’re doing yard work, whatever clothing you’re wearing is literally going to be soaked in sweat, it’s not funny.
The bigger problem in some cases, is that european houses are designed differently to american houses, so the houses tended to be unbearably warm unless they had AC. Though a lot of people were still losing it with how hot 85f was outside.
Dry heat is “nicer” only in the sense that at the same temperature, you sweat less. That’s it, 100f compared to 80f and humid, both are equally shit, one is just going to drench you in sweat and make you feel disgusting, while the other is going to exhaust you, drench you in sweat, and leave you feeling dry. With wet sticky clothing.
People in Egypt, Turkey, India, Philippine, etc, etc, etc die in 29.5°C heat? That’s news to me.
the joke here is people in the UK experiencing a heat wave. Guess i didn’t make that clear enough.
People in countries with much much hotter climates than the US use celsius, because most of the rest of the world uses celsius.
the US also has hot climates though? Have you looked the coverage of latitude that the US has? We have everything from directly on the equator, to about as near the north pole as you can get.
Freezing water at 0 and boiling water as 100 simplifies things a lot but also doesn’t make sense when it comes to things like weather, like, what am I supposed to wear outside when it’s 23 degrees?
The same thing you wear when its 75 F? Idk man, they’re just numbers. You can project whatever you want onto them.
Well, in that you’re right.
30 is hot, 20 is nice, 10 is chilly, and 0 is ice
Picked it up from a guy who teaches Latin on YouTube of all places
Shorts, T-shirt and flip-flops, or
Short sleeve shirt (Hawaii style), linen trousers, moccasins.
Something along those lines would be good at 23^o^ C.
.
As a lifelong celcius user I have a very intuitive sense of how 23 degrees celcius feels. I have no intuitive sense of how 50 degrees Fahrenheit feels.
If you’re used to a system then it’s intuitive.
I’m used to it, it’s fine.
0°C means that weather starts to be icy and you need to be careful when driving.
20°C is mild warm. 30°C is hot. 100°C is sauna.
would someone explain to me why whenever european people are confronted with the idea of the imperial system their brain seems to shutdown into a slow state of oxygen preservation? I genuinely don’t understand it.
“40c in f is 104???” yeah, round it, its 100f, you think we specify to the Nth degree here?
“86f doesn’t really make sense” yeah, round it. 90 is pretty close, and who boy 90s are pretty hot.
“why isn’t 50f the perfect temperature” you’re literally just applying an arbitrary point on something entirely arbitrary. But ok. (also it is the perfect temperature range between 50-70f)
“how is -17c and 37c cold and hot???” literally round it bro, -20 and 40c are right there wow look at that now it makes more sense! Im pretty sure this commenter is aussie or something, so in their defense, anything under 70f is cold for them. Either that or they don’t wear clothes, ever, because they’re calculating the coldness with no clothing. for some reason.
“yeah but we also think of things in relation to the temperature of water, like freezing is when shit is icy, and also the relation to the boiling point” brother, water boils in fahrenheit as well (212f, but again, you’re going to shocked by this one, you can round it down to 200f, wow look at that, it’s like, pretty close.) sure the freezing point is still higher, but you really only get freezes here at super prolonged periods of just under 30f weather, or really cold snaps that stick around a bit. generally snow in 30f weather is, not really a thing, the ground is still warm enough it melts. ice doesn’t form unless it’s like, close to 0.
guys, i promise, it’s not this hard. Just, think about it a little bit, please. You’re killing me here!
Tl;dr: just round. This goes both ways.
Converting a 1 significant digit number must not increase the number of significant digits.
literally this, just round.
This is what i do every time i have to think about celsius, i have rough equivalency ranges which often get my estimations into celsius within 1 or 2 degrees of the actual answer. All i need to know is a few rough datapoints and i can get a really usable output.
It’s actually just a skill issue.
The thing is that you need to learn celsius if you are doing science, but celsius users don’t really need to learn fahrenheit, so this isn’t really a problem that comes up for a lot of celsius users.
This is horrible logic. If anything, it should be: you need to learn Celsius if you are doing science, but most people aren’t scientists and therefore don’t need to learn Celsius, so this isn’t really a problem that comes up for a lot of Fahrenheit users.
maybe in high school science, but like you said, after that fact you really don’t touch it ever again, so it becomes a relatively dead concept in most peoples brain
yeah, and it’s like not that hard. If you talk to people that use fahrenheit on the regular, you should learn how to convert to fahrenheit right off the dome, just as they should learn to convert between celsius to fahrenheit as well.
Literally anything else is unreasonable lol.
Idk why you guys are so passionate about this whole rounding thing? Rounding off 107 to 100 doesn’t change the information, only the precision. It’s not easier to interpret 200 than 212 or anything?
If you want quick conversion, just
F ≈ 2 * C + 30
I like how this directly goes against the argument of Fahrenheit being more “graded” with integers lol
If you fail to provide uncertainty it suggest that Celsius is much more complicated because you need to pay attention to decimal points.
If you write 200 it would be anything between ±50and ±1 if you say 212 it means ± 2/1
I assure you, you get icy roads and snow at 28-30f. Upstate NY gets tons of snow and most of that is above 25f. I don’t see it get in the teens too much. Single digits or colder is pretty rare. All depends on the region up here. Due to the lakes, it is all over the place.
it depends on where you are, obviously, but out here we generally don’t get snow into about the 20-25f range, and we rarely get snow that sticks around 30f, it does snow then, but it all melts. as i previously said.
You’re missing the point. The issue with Fahrenheit is not about the conversion from Celsius, most Europeans don’t need to do that anyway. The problem is Fahrenheit in itself, it’s just not elegant or scientific and therefore comes off as arbitrary and only makes sense when you grow up with it.
yeah but why does that matter? It’s all relative, the only good thing about celsius is that it happens to line up nicely with one specific elements boiling point. If you’re doing science the only redeeming quality is that it maps linearly to kelvin, which is nice.
some of the relative math is nice, for certain units. But outside of that, for like, temperature, and cooking where none of that matters?
There’s a reason why drug dealers and those who have huffed too much under the fume hood still know metric like the back of their hand.
idk if they know it like the back of their hand. But to be fair, anybody with the collective ability of about half a brain cell can use the metric system, so that’s not really saying much.
…What?
you and me both
In Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, the number of thieves wasn’t really necessarily 40. The number was likely just chosen because 40 was an exaggerated number, much like when we’d say “I’ve told you a hundred million times”. So 40 as a shorthand for “a huge amount” seems fitting in celcius.
What about 101 Dalmatians?
How did the mother dog (no I’m not gonna use that word) not die?
The puppies did not have the same mother. Cruella had been collecting them from all over the place.
Ohhhhhh… you just cleared up something I believed for 20 years
This fairy tale is collected in a frame story in One Thousand and One Nights. Maybe the number of nights were also exaggerated…
it’s not about what makes more sense: what makes more sense is what you use everyday and is natural to you. 40+ C is freaking hot because when you experience it, it’s freaking hot. It’s about what the entire rest of the world is using as a standard.
Metric system is best system, no exceptions.
Anything over 40°C is fuckin’ hot, anything under 4°C is fuckin’ cold.
Anything over 31°C on a humid day is torture. As someone without AC, being indoors is the worst. What do you? Play games? Your devices heat up too.
Are ACs not viable for you? I don’t know I could do without one, sounds scary.
I live in the UK, getting an AC is not a matter to be discussed in polite company. Doing so upsets the queen and brings the Yankees to the door.
Yankees are easy to deal with, I certainly don’t want to be the reason her highness turns in her grave.
Betcha the queen had AC.
Her Highness sleeps with her window open, as evidenced by the various night strangers who climb in through her bedroom window for a chat.
My PC kept my room warm all winter, I now dread the incoming sun. Thank God for AC. Sorry for your loss there sir.
I’d argue anything over 30°C is hot, but yes.
you can only be living in a dry as fuck area if your fuckin hot threshold is at 40
Thankfully I am, but I was born and raised on the coast, so I know the pain of a 44°C day at close to 100% humidity.
Curious where you live, 4C would be just below t-shirt weather for me.
honestly in most of europe even thirty degrees is fucking hot, here in the nordics 25°C is considered too hot
.
41°C sounds terrifying to me
Where i live it can go up to 53°C in the summer. In summer when there is a streak of very hot days and there’s like a 41°C day, you will hear people out saying " oh, today it’s quite cool, that’s nice!"
At 64°C wax melts. 53 is quite hot.
imgur.com/a/5P1QEQK
Fahrenheit is such a nice system. 0 is really, really cold and 100 is really really hot. So 50 must just be perfect, right?
Way more intuitive then Celsius.
Celsius isn’t all that different.
-30 is really really cold, 30 is really really hot.
0 is just about perfect.
Okay Mr. Freeze
More like 0 is really cold and 40 is really hot, so 20 must be perfect, which it is.
Eh I can barely breathe at 30. 40 is certain death. Except in a sauna, where 100 is no problem and we throw water on the rocks to make it feel hotter.
I know, it’s weird. I’ve got pictures of me lying around in a pile of snow in a t-shirt, trying to cool down. At -15.
Might be a location thing, where I live temperatures over 30 are the norm (humid too, shit sucks). 40 days are rare but not unheard of either. Meanwhile, my only experience with anything lower than 15 is the fridge.
I live around 60 degrees North :)
It is intuitive because you are used to it.
Also isn’t 101 also really really hot? Or what about 99? And how about 1, isn’t that also really really cold? It is an arbitrary frame of reference you have set up in an attempt to make a non-intuitive system more easily accesible.
I’m not understanding your counterpoint… it’s a scale no matter which system you use?
Lol it is the same reason why you all argue for metric though? Celsius is random numbers nonsense. Fahrenheit is a scale that makes sense. 0 freeze, 100 boil. Don’t you metric heads love that shit or you just lying the whole time?
Ah America, bigger is always a better isn’t it?
In fairness, that isn’t just America. It’s kind of a male thing. Lol
ITT: Europeans tie their personal identity to an arbitrary scale for the expression of mean entropy.
It’s no just Wuropeans, but the majority of the world
Forty-one sounds insanely hot as an outside temperature if that’s the standard you’re used to. And that’s the thing that the Fahrentards refuse to wrap their head around.
Fahernhaters are always like, “nooo!! 40 degrees is so hot!!” Meanwhile, the fahrenchad’s resting body temperature is nearly 2.5 times hotter. All fahernhaters would die at that temperature.
No one is gonna post this vid?!?
youtu.be/mR-DrvZ5VMA?feature=shared
Nice vid. He isn’t wrong. Though maybe we could come up with a compromise temperature scale for everyone to use. Even 100 F isn’t as uncommon as it used to be. But I would love to have more granularity without decimals.
Once again… the classic argument of: “Well, I grew up using this system, and I’m used to the system. I have built an internal intuition for how hot and cold the temperature is. I am used to >100 being hot! 40 is not hot!”
Well then. I grew up using celcius and… “IT’S FOURTY FUCKING ONE DEGREES OUTSIDE?” sounds just as hot.
The joke
Your head
No… I get it… 41 < 105… I totally agree haha funny joke. I’m just over this debate. Who gives a fuck what temperature scale you use? Just use the one you know. We have conversions for that reason.
No, that’s not it, we’re measuring in incredulity units, which are syllables.
“One hun-dred and se-ven?!” == 6 syllables
“For-ty one?!” == 3 syllables
Also, the first one has more vowel sounds to really draw out to indicate higher levels of I-can’t-even. It sounds only golly-jeepers in Celsius, and much more I’m-so-done-with-this-shit in Fahrenheit.
Ah true.
Yeah, but you can’t argue that adding a whole digit doesn’t make it seem bigger. And take a kid who doesn’t yet know either system. They for sure will think 107 is hotter then 41. That said, I wish everywhere that gave a temp in the US would give both so I could get a better sense of Celsius. Most apps and such let you choose one or the other, but not both.
I read that as “take that from a kid who doesn’t know either system,” and I was about to say are you living under a rock or something?
I could only wish to be so oblivious. :)
On the other hand it dilutes the effect of lower values because a lot of them are double digit. 20F, 40F, 60F… all double digit, but wildly varying. On the other hand, with Celsius you get:
I do like 0 as freezing. We should have a new one where 0 is 0C, and 100 is 100F. Or maybe 1000 is 100F so I can get my extra resolution without decimals
Yeah, I grew up in Fahren-wasteland, but have lived in Celsi-heaven for 7 years. I embraced it, and now when someone says “40 FUCKING DEGREES!!” I know exactly what they’re talking about. It’s hot. You probably don’t have an air con. It’s misery.
Just use Kelvin. Problem solved.
Or be chaotic and use Rankine
Planck Temperature Units, everything else is a corollary fantasy
K users
Celsius peopke are cold blooded.
0 Degrees Farenhight = very cold, 100 Defrees Farenhight = very hot
0 Degrees Celcius = very cold, 100 Degrees Celcius = dead
0 Degrees Kelvin = dead, 100 Degrees Kelvin = also dead…
Jsyk, Kelvin doesn’t use degrees, they just use Kelvin. Good to know so nerds won’t get mad at you :)
I wouldn’t classify 0°C as very cold, just cold. 0°F definitely deserves the very.
Around here, 32°F is very cold in October, but an occasion to wear shorts in February. (Both are still cookout temperatures, though.)
I live in the Phoenix area - if it ever gets down to 32°F I’m dancing in the street.
100°F broken sauna.
100°C sauna is fine.
I present the temperature scale that I made up- the Human Scale (H°)
I thought about the Fahrenheit vs Celsius debate, and I think both have practical uses, however I think combined they could make a very practical scale.
Fahrenheit: while my American sensibilities agree that 100° is a good marker for what % of my patience is used up to cut a bitch, I think a similar place would be the average human body temperature. For this reason, 100°H = 98.6°F . It’s not a perfect match, but it can still give us the satisfaction of “IT’S 100°!?” while having practical implications for medical uses “your body temperature is 102°, 2° warmer than average”.
Celsius: I think this scale makes a ton of sense for colder temperatures. When the thermometer reads 0°, that’s when you can expect snow. For this reason, 0°H = 0°C.
The conversation rates are:
H = (F-32) × 1.5
H= C × 2.7
More precise is
H = (F-32) × 1.501501501…
H = C × 2.7027027027…
While using the freezing point of water and the average human body temperature seem like inconsistent and arbitrary benchmarks, my goal is less about consistency and more about practicality for everyday use.
Now watch this scale grow as big as Esperanto.
This… Is actually a pretty good idea.
There’s a few meme images around that Celsius is how water “feels” and Fahrenheit is how people feel (and Kelvin is how atoms feel), which isn’t entirely off base…
But frankly, I would support human scale more than Fahrenheit. I live in a country with Celsius, and my only real gripe with it is that whole degrees are not very precise. You have to go to half-degrees, or even 1/10th of a degree to get reasonable precision on temperature.
Just seems like the human scale would work well for 90% of use cases, aside from science where we should be using either Celsius or Kelvin.
the problem is that the average body temperature is slowly decreasing, so this isn’t that well defined, we would need to link it to an event that is at constant temperature
also the celsius scale isn’t that good imo because it’s about the freezing and boiling of water at ambient pressure so it isn’t universal
I say we set the boltzmann constant to a known value, and define temperatures from there
after that we find a range of temperature with useful round values and offset the scale for everyday use
So I had to look up the Boltzmann constant and… That’s a lot of math.
I think you have a point on the decreasing human temperature. It looks like the decrease is at 0.05°F every decade, which actually is quite a bit. If it was something like 0.005°F, I’d say that that’s a problem for the people of the year 2500 to solve.
That said, the reason it’s been decreasing seems to be due to medical advances and not some change in the Earth’s gravity or climate change. I would be surprised to see humans in the year 2500 having an average body temperature of 72.9°F, or closing in on 0°F in the year 3,984. I imagine there will be fluctuations, but there’s got to be a lower limit to what is physically possible.
I’d still defend the Celsius number, since even though there are changes due to air pressure, it’s changing over space and not time. In the year 2500, water at sea level will still freeze at 0°C.
I think my big thing is I’m less concerned about a logically consistent scale, and more towards a scale that’s geared to the emotional side of temperature.
Thinking outloud moment
If we are going for the emotional side of temperature specifically, we would also need to factor in wind, humidity, sunlight, what season it is, etc. and that’s a lot of variables, and even then that’s how you get the wind-chill factor. But even that is almost completely subjective. I feel like that scale would go from “IT’S GOTTA BE NEGATIVE A MILLION FUCKIN’ DEGREES” to “I FEEL LIKE IM ON THE SURFACE OF THE SUN, so like a bazillion degrees” and then we go to the traffic report.
Either way, it’s not a perfect scale, but I’d still take that over the other two.
This is great! It’s gonna be as big as The Swatch .beat!
I believe the Fahrenheit scale was originally set up for 100° to be human body temperature. We’re just built colder now I guess? I had to look up what zero was and apparently he originally set it at the coldest the air had ever been around his village, but later had to standardize it and so cooked up some brine that froze at 0°.
I would propose that 100 should be calibrated around the wet bulb temperature, which I think is around 105°F but varies with humidity. That’s the temperature where sweating doesn’t cool you off any more, so any temperature 100 or more is deadly to most people. I like 0 being freezing for water, seems sensible and is also a good “prolonged exposure to this or lower will kill you” cutoff point.
I heard it was supposed to be human body temperature, but they used horse body temperature instead because it was close to human body temperature but more… stable.
Straight to jail with you
the wet bulb temperature^1^ is just the temperature of a wet thermometer, and varies with humidity and temperature. Wet bulb temp is never higher than the dry bulb temp, so (entertainingly) you’re proposing that the meaning of 100° varies wildly and is always lower than the true temperature, effectively making the air temperature always ≥100°, and increases when the air is drier, like some sort of inverse relative humidity.
^1^(I’m aware you probably didn’t mean wet bulb temperature here, but let’s have fun with the idea) :)
41° is “mild” to me as a Celsius user only because my country is too fucking hot in the first place.
In the end it’s the humidity that gets you
That’s just regional though. Not much humidity in a lot of California. Not much humidity in Oregon, though there can be some. Fair amount of humidity in Wisconsin. Lots of humidity in Florida.
But one universal truth between all 4 of those states, despite the humidity, is when it’s 107 fucking degrees!?
I hate “but its a dry heat” people. At 95, maybe. At 107, fuck you 107 is 107.
While I agree 107 is 107 and it sucks regardless, at like 30% humidity my sweat can evaporated and do it’s job of keeping me cooler, at 98% humidity your sweat has a much much harder time evaporating and it actively feels hotter. The time I spent living in Florida taught me that yes dry heat is absolutely better.
I’m perfectly aware scientifically its better, but as somebody who doesn’t live in 107 degree territory - 107 can fuck off any way you slice it. 🤣
I hate that I agree with this lol
That’s why I only use Kelvin. 314.15 sounds like 3 times more “WTF HOW HOT IS TODAY??!?” than your paltry 107
YOU’RE BOILING?!?
Oh, you’re just an inbecile who likes to prove the movie Idiocracy is actually a documentary.
Fuck it. I’m inventing a new scale.
Behold! “Disagree Degrees”. We’re going to combine the best traits of the other units. No more searching for the stupid little degree character in the character map. D for degrees or disagrees - whatever, I don’t give a shit.
0D = 0K (Like Kelvin, no negatives! That’s so dumb!) 0.4D = -40 C and -40 F 1D = Water Freezing point (Need a consistent point of scale) 10D = “Pleasant temperature” 100D = Kind of hot 500D = Really hot for people (>40C or >100F) “It’s like 500 disagrees out there!” 1000D= Water boiling (To match the freezing temp) 1,000,000,000,000D = Surface of the sun
Good luck on the math converting to other units, this temperature scale isn’t about being useful for nerd stuff, it’s all about appealing to our emotions.
“Bigger number is more better” also explains American sports where you get 3 points for running a bit and then play stops for an ad break and the national anthem.
I mean… assuming you’re talking about American football, there’s at least one scoring move that awards one point, so it makes sense for more difficult scoring moves to give more points. The harder the action is to complete, the more points you get for doing it.