Celisus vs Farenheit

Status
Not open for further replies.
Besoeker said:
Don't know where you get that from but the 20 oz v 16 oz pint is rather more than 6.5%.

But my simple point was that a pint isn't a pound the world round.
Click to expand...

The 16 oz pint is 0.935 lb., hence my version of the rhyme. Not "spot on", I'll grant you, but close enough for my 5-year old son here in the US. I'll bore him with the details when he's a teenager and more likely to be exasperated by his dad's pedantry. Otherwise, what fun would it be? :lol:
 
Besoeker said:
Check post #33.
Click to expand...

Okay, get the flowchart out.

In #31 I said BETTER.
In #32 You said FINER
In #33 In poor phrasing I attempted to correct you that FINER was not desired, it was a BETTER fit.
Blah Blah and Blah :sleep:

And Goldilocks tried the little bed and it was just right. :cool:
 
pfalcon said:
Okay, get the flowchart out.

In #31 I said BETTER.
In #32 You said FINER
In #33 In poor phrasing I attempted to correct you that FINER was not desired, it was a BETTER fit.
Blah Blah and Blah :sleep:

And Goldilocks tried the little bed and it was just right. :cool:
Click to expand...
You clearly did not, and do not, understand understand the meaning of finer in the context it was used.
That you don't understand the finer detail is fine by me.
 
John120/240 said:
Thank You all It's been a interesting topic. I notice why we are electricans,

& not english teachers because a lot of us can not spell.
Click to expand...
At least I have an excuse - I'm not English.
Slightly more seriously, when I started secondary school aged eleven, I had to write an essay every week. If it had four or more spelling errors the reward was a swift strike on the hand with a leather strap. It may be debatable whether it is the right method to teach spelling but it worked for me.
 
weressl said:
That would have been redundant since the weight/volume relationship was already referenced.;)
Click to expand...
Yes, it was. I was just noting another convenient conversion.
It's also a bit handy that g is quite close to 10 m/s^2
Close enough to help with a quick mental arithmetic check on calculations.
 
peter said:
For the most part, the metric system is better. But, as for temperature, the fahrenheit system is preferable because it uses a smaller unit than the centigrade system. One degree centigrade is almost two degrees fahrenheit.
Since we now use American units, I think it wise that the Code should get rid of the metric system and use the American system.
~Peter
Click to expand...
HI ALL,In air-conditioning system calculations,use is solely made of the Fahrenheit system.So it may not be possible to get rid of Fahrenheit system entirely from Engineering.
 
I may be stating the obvious, but the reason for the oz/lb and oz/gal relationships is that in order to weigh or measure something accurately all you need is a double pan balance for weights or identical containers for liquids. If you start with an accurate lb or gal, you can get to an oz or oz without having to have a standard weight or volume handy. That is not true of the metric system; you can't start with a kilo and get to a gram with a pan balance.
 
ggunn said:
I may be stating the obvious, but the reason for the oz/lb and oz/gal relationships is that in order to weigh or measure something accurately all you need is a double pan balance for weights or identical containers for liquids. If you start with an accurate lb or gal, you can get to an oz or oz without having to have a standard weight or volume handy. That is not true of the metric system; you can't start with a kilo and get to a gram with a pan balance.
Click to expand...
Good points with historical perspective. A pound being 16 ounces divides down nicely for weighing out parts of pounds to a resolution of one part in 16 with a mechanical balance. Nice in that you need relatively few counterweights to get all single ounces in discrete steps.
That's fine if you have a commodity that can be weighed out that way. Sugar, tea, coffee, flour, maybe. But when it comes to potatoes it doesn't quite work so well. If you still want to use mechanical means for weighing you might choose a steelyard. It's still a mechanical balance but the fulcrum isn't in the middle and you can adjust weights on the longer arm and you are not constrained by fixed steps.
 
John120/240 said:
Why did we go with celisus for tempature factors ? Everybody knows 98.6,

32, 212. We can all relate to these farenheit tempatures. We never adopted

the meter, liter, kilometer at least not in wide use.
Click to expand...

They're in wide use in many applications in everyday life.

Look at the tires on your car. Its a wicked system. It will say something like P225/50R16. This means the tread is 225 millimeter wide, side wall is 50% of tread width and that it is intended to be used with a 16 inch wheel. This system's been in use since the 70s.

Many Buicks had a "one gallon displacement" engine, but they're never called that, they're called 3.8 liter. Cubic inches are seldom used in new car specs today.

The most common liquor bottle is 750ml. Soda bottle is 2L, but milk jugs are gallon rather than 4L.
 
Forgive me if this has been posted already. I started reading through this and got bored to tears:cry:. But the way I convert C to F is take the degrees in C and multiply by 1.8 then add 32 and you get F.
 
Little Bill said:
Forgive me if this has been posted already. I started reading through this and got bored to tears:cry:. But the way I convert C to F is take the degrees in C and multiply by 1.8 then add 32 and you get F.
Click to expand...

My company's software works in K.

It's the only way that I can use -1 and know it's not a valid temperature ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top