Why isn't the metric system the only system taught?

Another reason why the U.S. will NEVER convert solely to metric (we use both):

"Who has the guts to push an idea like this forward in the country today? If Republicans championed the cause, Democrats would rail against it. And vice versa. And unfortunately, engineers, scientists and the like don’t have the kind of lobby that would be needed to get politicians interested. Even a public relations disaster like losing the Mars Climate Orbiter (due to a conversion mishap) didn’t move the needle on fully switching to Metric. So I guess I’ll just wait with you for that long-off day when we get the first flying car—and wonder what kind of miles per gallon that thing will get."
 
Another reason why the U.S. will NEVER convert solely to metric (we use both):

"Who has the guts to push an idea like this forward in the country today? If Republicans championed the cause, Democrats would rail against it. And vice versa. And unfortunately, engineers, scientists and the like don’t have the kind of lobby that would be needed to get politicians interested. Even a public relations disaster like losing the Mars Climate Orbiter (due to a conversion mishap) didn’t move the needle on fully switching to Metric. So I guess I’ll just wait with you for that long-off day when we get the first flying car—and wonder what kind of miles per gallon that thing will get."
Honestly, on the long list of stuff that needs doing, it seems pretty low on the list to me too, which is probably Reason #1 it's never championed. Industries can self-solve this for metric or imperial using whatever standards bodies already exist. So it'd just be road signs?

Meh.

Right?

:D
 
There are cases where each is better. ex. It's fairly easy to estimate in Feet or Inches, as the average human anatomy is a point of reference. Metric is also easier in many cases. Why can't we use both? (I'm a fan where it makes sense). This seems to me more a religious war....besides that, now we have computers in our hand that can make the conversions.
 
I agree in that it's a bit easier to estimate in the imperial system, but other than that it makes no sense. People who have grown up using the metric system estimate just as well.

When I was a kid I could estimate in meters VERY well, but when I started working and everyone used feet, I got used to that. Still, whenever I do precision work of any kinda I ALWAYS use the metric system, and generally so does everyone else here.

Even as a luthier if I have to make measurements to a " 25 1/2 inch " scale guitar I work in mm.

So does Warmoth - they have admitted that the only reason they keep the '25 1/2' and other measurements like that is because people are used to calling it that, so it avoids confusion, but they always measure in mm and when they unveil new products it's in mm, and people call it by the mm measurement - it's just about people getting used to it.
 
Turns out, the Apollo guidance computers actually used SI units (metric) but values were converted to imperial for display. Source code shows the calculations were done using metric units. They used both. In the last decade or so they've undertaken standardizing everything to SI units for full compatibility of tools and supplies with other international space agencies and to avoid future mishaps like the one that lost them a Mars orbiter probe in 1999.
 
I run into metric vs imperial problems all day every day. Enter an orbit radius in feet, the system converts it into metric because computers, and fir display purposes the converted radius is re-converted to feet. Boom... around 13 feet are lost in the conversion. Not a big deal in a dynamic thing such as flying but you can see the difference. In one case, 800 feet of radius becomes 787 feet after the conversion.
Maritime and aviation makes it all even worse. 1 knot = 1 nautical mile per hour. A statute mile is 5,280 feet. A nautical mile is around 6,076 feet, around 2,025 yards, and therefore around 1,852 meters. 1 nautical mile = 1.15 statute mikes. It’s enough to drive you insane. How many different tons are there? Short ton, long ton, metric ton, harbour ton, deadweight ton, assay ton (short and long variants)...

Why doesn’t it change although it makes every bit of sense to do so? Tradition and cost. Changing all those signs alone would cost billions. I think there’s a little but of the fact that the ambiguity imperial and archaic units causes is to the advantage of some. Converting everything to metric makes things simpler. That costs less, which means someone on the backend isn’t making as much as when there were more salients to take advantage of.
 
Here's more to tickle your pickle. The US doesn't even use proper Imperial units for everything. We have our own called United States Customary Units.

1 US fluid ounce = 1.041 Imperial fluid ounces
1 liquid U.S. gallon = 0.833 Imperial gallons
1 dry U.S. gallon = 0.968 Imperial gallons
1 US ton = 0.893 Imperial tons

On top of that, all of our own goofy measurement units are actually defined by US law by their SI/metric equivalents. We have no other point of reference except the internationally accepted SI standards (which themselves were redefined in 2019).
 
  • Wow
Reactions: jon
I run into metric vs imperial problems all day every day. Enter an orbit radius in feet, the system converts it into metric because computers, and fir display purposes the converted radius is re-converted to feet. Boom... around 13 feet are lost in the conversion. Not a big deal in a dynamic thing such as flying but you can see the difference. In one case, 800 feet of radius becomes 787 feet after the conversion.
Maritime and aviation makes it all even worse. 1 knot = 1 nautical mile per hour. A statute mile is 5,280 feet. A nautical mile is around 6,076 feet, around 2,025 yards, and therefore around 1,852 meters. 1 nautical mile = 1.15 statute mikes. It’s enough to drive you insane. How many different tons are there? Short ton, long ton, metric ton, harbour ton, deadweight ton, assay ton (short and long variants)...

Why doesn’t it change although it makes every bit of sense to do so? Tradition and cost. Changing all those signs alone would cost billions. I think there’s a little but of the fact that the ambiguity imperial and archaic units causes is to the advantage of some. Converting everything to metric makes things simpler. That costs less, which means someone on the backend isn’t making as much as when there were more salients to take advantage of.
This is what happened to the Mars Climate Orbiter. Couple hundred million bucks went poof when it tried to orbit below the surface of Mars.
 
Why doesn’t it change although it makes every bit of sense to do so? Tradition and cost. Changing all those signs alone would cost billions. I think there’s a little but of the fact that the ambiguity imperial and archaic units causes is to the advantage of some. Converting everything to metric makes things simpler. That costs less, which means someone on the backend isn’t making as much as when there were more salients to take advantage of.

Why doesn't it change? Because the US doesn't want too. And it is big and dominant enough to tell the others to go ef themselves. If the US had the international standing and power of the Netherlands you'd all switched to metric probably a century ago. Now you don't have too. And we have to suffer accordingly. As Mel Brooks said, it's good to be the king!
 
It's not like some collective stand has been taken to not change over. International trade and outsourcing has already made many industries change over. Iconic US companies like Ford, General Motors, Caterpillar, John Deere, Xerox, and IBM have all switched over to metric. With more and more industries slowly changing over, it's just a matter of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon
Think global act local.
This.

I affirm that saying, not because I think it gains anything from having once been a popular bumper-sticker (plenty of bumper-sticker slogans are inane or too vague to convey meaning) but rather because it indicates individual action rather than compelling others.

Of all the large-scale changes that one might impose from the top down, the change from Imperial to Metric seems to be the most obviously-right, the clearest advantage, the total no-brainer. I have no arguments against it, on the merits.

BUT, I admit that compelling an independent dairy-farmer to relabel all his wares in a way that his own customers aren't currently familiar with comes across to me as...presumptuous. Nosy. Being a busybody. Being a "Karen," as everyone seems these days to be saying. (I know only 3 women named Karen and the meme isn't descriptive of any of them, but whatever.)

And I think in our world, this tendency of Joe Regulator to stick his oar in, because he just knows he's got it right, and all the experts are on his side, and he's personally convinced how much better life will be if everyone gets on board with his plan ...I think that tendency is already too common. It isn't just bad for the regulatees, whenever Joe (oops!) gets things wrong. It's also bad for Joe Regulator, even when he's actually right. For of course the natural instinct of any free-thinking soul is to tell Joe to buzz off and mind his own dam' business. The resulting dynamic undermines Joe's credibility when important things are afoot, for the same reasons as with the "little boy who cried wolf."

Now, "think global act local" doesn't suffer from any of those problems.

If enough people make changes on their own initiative, and when the opportunity is ideal for them, it'll still happen. It'll happen slower, to be sure...but that's an acceptable trade-off for not engendering resentment and disrespect for regulatory authorities, elite contempt for the needs of those subject to regulation, and stresses on small businesses attempting costly compliance with diktats that don't necessarily make sense in their local market.

Like I said: Converting from Imperial to Metric is a no-brainer. If ever there was a case to be made for saying, "Screw the little guy's concerns, let's just get this thing done and move on," it would be this case.

But, I think, I'm happy to see some governments having the humility and self-constraint to let the thing happen more slowly and organically. Since it is always the policy-maker's chief temptation to be grandiose, I find it easier to trust the folks who don't go whole-hog, even when the case for doing so seems a slam-dunk.
 
Different. Math and measurements should use the most practical form that can be extrapolated easily. Metric system does this, Imperial system does not. Language is not the same discussion.
Math and measurement is mostly impracticable because its mostly about the costs.

For example... a designer designs a building based off cost, then space, the measurements are irrelevant beyond those variables.

A building foundation wall length is never designed around nominal block size, and never is equally divisible by the size of the block. Would make the construction of the building faster, easier if the building was rounded to the nearest block dimensions... but it's about the cost, not the ease of measurement.

And then a 2 by 4 is not 2" by 4"
 
Math and measurement is mostly impracticable because its mostly about the costs.

For example... a designer designs a building based off cost, then space, the measurements are irrelevant beyond those variables.

A building foundation wall length is never designed around nominal block size, and never is equally divisible by the size of the block. Would make the construction of the building faster, easier if the building was rounded to the nearest block dimensions... but it's about the cost, not the ease of measurement.

And then a 2 by 4 is not 2" by 4"

Wait....wut? o_O
 
One of the hottest girls in high school was named Karen. Just saying. I feel bad for the hot Karen’s of the world who aren’t obnoxious.
 
Back
Top Bottom