- 7 days
Just ask the Danish how to “calculate” their word for 90, and you will consider the French approach simplicistic.
- 7 days
In a way, Danish is more clear than French, because all numbers between 50 and 90 are based on the vigesimal (base-20) system.
- 7 days
90 = Half fives.
50 = Half sixty.
70 = Half (I don’t even know how to translate this)
- 7 days
Huh? 50 is halvtreds (20 * 2.5)
70 is actually halvfjerdensindstyve, literally “half to the four(th20) times 20”. So the base number (20) * 3.5…
The problem is, Danish people can’t understand each other even with the simplest of words, so they just say halvfjerds.
- 7 days
70 = halfway to the fourth twenty
In other words, three twenties are 60, four twenties are 80, halfway between them is 70.
Same for the other ones: 50 is halfway to the third twenty, 90 is half more than the fourth twenty.
- rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
Me in high school french:
70: soixante-dix ohhh trippy, 60 10, why not start at 50, that’s strange so 80 will be soixante-vingt (60 20) right? … right?
80: quatre-vingt 4 20’s?
but why 60 20 and then 4 20?
Seems like my lifelong hatred for the French was justified after all!
- rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish6 days
LOL, They weren’t so bad. I even went to Paris. TBH, I think the American tourists over there was much worse :) Prisians give off an NYC leave me the fuck alone vibe.
- 7 days
Back in Frances time these were large numbers. One million five hundred thousand one hundred eight, like ??? That’s how people in the future will look at you when you say that number in English. Stop counting people, our brains are not meant for this
Country burning to a crisp because of the climate armageddon? Far indeed.
- 7 days
Unlike English when the name for those is seven-tens, eoght-tens, nine-tens?
Or “four score (20) and seven years ago” (4x20, +7= 87)
Or Roman numerals being like XIV (10, + (5-1) = 14)
…the numbers have always been maths. Always
I take no complaints on that subject from people who measure in inches, feet and ounces.
- 8 days
We adopted the standard. The boat with the official measurements sank on the way over, you unread swine.
Fun fact: the moon landing was programmed and calculated in metric.
So, laughs in moon landing units.
- Zwiebel@feddit.orgEnglish8 days
US units have all been redefined in relation to metric, so technically they use metric just with wierd factors
- 7 days
Because of all the Canadian engineers who went to work for Nasa after the arrow project was cancelled
You (meaning the US) had 200 years to undo one mistake and you failed.
- 7 days
Fahrenheit is an extremely useful temperature scale for the lives of humans - 0 and 100 each representing the approximate extreme (cold and hot respectively) beyond which significant exposure is dangerous to human life
That F is zeroed out on fucking Brine makes it the most absurd thing.
Like OK there may be an argument for base 12 or base 16 (but not both)… But a mixture of water, ice, and sodium chloride?
Like OK blame a German I guess , but at least they were smart enough to decide, “Das ist stupid”
- Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish8 days
C is pretty made up too. Why water, and why sea level? Don’t complain about F if you aren’t using K, where zero actually means zero. Anything else is just picking arbitrary points that you like for one reason or another.
- 8 days
Why water
Because it’s one of the most abundant resources available on earth that is imperative to our understanding of the existence of life and is the commonest solution regularly used by humans in scenarios where temperature is a relevant factor.
why sea level?
Because vast swathes of humanity live at or near sea level, where we already arbitrarily nominate the level of atmospheric pressure to be 1 ATM.
While K has a natural zero-point, the gradation (by your logic) is entirely arbitrary as well because it’s based on C and not some other cosmological constant.
- Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish8 days
I know why water was chosen. Brine also has characteristics that are useful. My point was that it’s just one (specific version of a) molecule at one specific altitude, and pressure varies, so there is no true “sea level pressure”. It is not a concrete thing where zero means zero.
Metric I love. C is not metric though. It’s an SI unit, but not metric, as often as those are conflated. It doesn’t have any fundamental advantage over F.
- 7 days
“<0°C” => snowy weather and my freezer is working properly is a good advantage
- 7 days
I can’t be certain that this is the exact reason, but I believe it’s because metric units are based on measurements of fresh water at sea level. 1 kg = 1 litre = 1 m³ of fresh water at sea level. If fresh water at sea level has been used to standardize everything else, then why wouldn’t you use it as the standard to calibrate a scale of 0 (least water movement) to 100 (most water movement)?
The problem with using K back when ⁰C were being standardized is that it’s really really difficult to get your hands on some absolute zero. Also, since we generally use ⁰C to measure things here on Earth, I’d argue that the basis for C is just as arbitrary as the basis for metric. I think the equivalent of arguing for K over C would be to argue for light years or astronomical units over kilometres.
- Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
I’m not arguing for K over C. I’m arguing that C and F are both fine. People acting like C is fundamentally better are mistaken. They’re both just setting 0 as some useful value that we can still go below.
0 (least water movement) to 100 (most water movement)
Temperature is a measure of movement. If we can continue to lower or raise the temperature, these are not the lowest or highest values for movement.
And people arguing for C because it’s metric are just wrong, because it isn’t metric. It’s frequently used by the same people who use the metric system, but it isn’t metric. The metric unit for temperature is K.
I agree that K is impractical. C and F have far more utility in everyday life. In my opinion, they’re both fine. For cooking, I tend to think in C. For weather, I tend to think in F. They’re both just arbitrary choosing useful values, and this means they’re both useful for different things.
- 7 days
You know what? This is completely on me. I put words in your mouth by saying that C is just as reasonable as m, l, and g, but at no point did you voice support one way or the other. For all I know, your arguments across the spectrum may be based on absolute values. Perhaps you prefer measurements for time and distance based on the hyperfine transition of hydrogen, and weight based on atomic mass.
I was pushing the rationale that arguing for metric units, which are based on freshwater at sea level, but against C, which is also based on (the perceived states of) freshwater at sea level, is an inconsistent argument. But, once again, you didn’t push that narrative; I made assumptions and attributed that narrative to you.
- halcyoncmdr@piefed.socialEnglish8 days
God forbid the units used by the average person in everyday life are easily divisible by whole numbers, not resulting in things like infinitely repeating decimals.
Yeah, thats why metric is better. Sigfigs are better than fractions and weird conversions.
- halcyoncmdr@piefed.socialEnglish8 days
Ah yes, measuring out anything into thirds is awesome with metric. Nothing ever needs to be split into thirds.
- nightlily@leminal.spaceEnglish8 days
What happens in American customary units if you need to split it into 7ths?
Significant Figures. Things are rarely one third down past 3-4 sigfigs. Maybe 6+ if you’re being really precise or EDMing a part.
- 7 days
Good point. Splitting things in to 3rds is the most common function of everything. Why, just the other day I was building a box. I started by measuring the largest face of the backplate and subtracting the thickness of the side plates so I could figure out the internal volume. Most people would have done a simple equation like x-y but I prefer to do 3((x/3) - (y/3)). It’s a much cleaner method.
- 8 days
Yeah I hate when I have to convert temperatures between systems, and then the nice round numbers that represent common values used in everyday life like 0, 20, 30, 40, and 100 become absolutely nonsensical values like 32, 68, 86, 104 and 212
Metric measurements are only decimals in North America because things are fabricated to be round imperial numbers for the American market. When you buy a piece of lumber in Europe it’s cut to 45x95mm which (shockingly) converts to the absolutely nonsensical 1.77165x3.74016 inch two by four
- halcyoncmdr@piefed.socialEnglish8 days
When you buy a piece of lumber in Europe it’s cut to 45x95mm which (shockingly) converts to the absolutely nonsensical 1.77165x3.74016 inch two by four
Ah yes, nice round numbers there as well with metric. Why isn’t it just 50x100mm? And that conversion is not even the imperial measurement of a 2x4, and you clearly don’t understand where the dimensions come from.
There are nominal dimensions, and actual dimensions for lumber. The name 2x4 is the nominal dimension, the rough size before drying and planing. Between the forest and the hardware store, a board loses material twice.
-
A log goes through a sawmill and gets cut into rough boards. At this point, a 2x4 really is about 2" x 4". Green (freshly cut) wood contains 30% or more moisture.
-
The boards go into a kiln where hot air drops the moisture content to about 19%, as water leaves the cells, the board shrinks. The dried boards are rough and uneven. A planer shaves all four sides smooth. S4S (Surfaced Four Sides) means all four faces are planed. The planer removes another 1/8" or so from each face.
Result: a board that started at 2" x 4" ends up at a standard measurement of 1-1/2" x 3-1/2".
Now to get back to the metric equivalent… that 45x95mm board… starts with a nominal dimension of 47x100mm. Neither the nominal or actual dimensions are nice round numbers here, although at least the actual dimensions at the end are a multiple of 5. Why some places also refer to these as a 2x4, well they’re the equivalent even though the actual size is completely unrelated.
UK example- 8 days
Not sure why you assumed I didn’t already know that (I did), but thanks for the completely pointless off topic essay I guess
-
- 8 days
God forbid units used by the average person in everyday life are easily converted between, not resulting in things like ‘how many feet are in a mile’.
- 8 days
The main conversions would be betwren meters and centimeters ot in your case feet and inches. Those happen way more often.
And as soon as you get slightly out of most everyday lives but still quite everyday into the realm of unit conversion betwren different things like volume, speed, power what have you imperial just falls apart.
Nice! You’re my first elitist, eurotrash, shithead block of the day! Good work, Pierre!
Thank you, would you then like some info on the old British monetary system? Fartings, guineas, halfpences and the likes?
- 8 days
Oligarchs hijack the government to oppose the will of people, obviously that means every single US American wholeheartedly supports their oppressors. You must read so many books to be that smart.
- 8 days
Make a comment that doesn’t do well
Cry and say you were ragebaiting like that’s a thing people like or are ok with
Curl up alone and night and wonder why
- 8 days
Wow joking about a fascist takeover that’s eroding freedom and killing people on a global scale?
Maybe not your best decision of the day.
- 7 days
🤓 Technically there are septante, octante/huitante, nonante, but it’s either considered local to some region (belgium, switzerland, etc) or old-school
What the fuck is wrong with people believing “octante” is used anywhere??? This is so prevailing. As far as I know no-one on earth uses “octante”. We say “huitante” And the belgians were undecisive and still use “quatre-vingt”
Re-reading my comment, I seen that it seems a bit mean, sorry. I just cannot believe how widespread this misconception is.
- 6 days
No worry, its understandable. Im not using those terms regularly so you were in the right position for pointing out this one does not exist anymore.
- 8 days
Quatre vingt dix neuf is hands down my favourite french number. It’s only one syllable more than ninety nine.
- ryper@lemmy.caEnglish8 days
Captain Picard is French so he ought to be in a better position to answer the question than most of us.
- 8 days
Captain Picard and his brother were sent off to an old fashioned English boarding school by their luddite father that didn’t allow them to transport home in the evening or weekends, thus their English accents (my head canon).
Picard’s brother became indoctrinated into the same fucked up luddite philosophy and didn’t even allow 24th century fire safety technology in his home, leading to the death of him, his wife and his son due to a fire (actual canon).
- 7 days
Considering we don’t have 24th century fire tech yet I’m guessing this is about Star Trek.
