Is -6 colder than -8?

[notjustjay]

Or we could just live somewhere where it's always -40 degrees and no one would ever have to worry about units...

Great! Come on over to Canada! 😀

Naw, it's not ALWAYS cold here, but we have definitely had some winter days where it's so cold that the Celsius and Fahrenheit scales actually almost coincide... -50 degrees (with wind chill) is !@$#!@ cold, no matter which one you use!

 

[Mac OS X Ocelot]

Kelvin is great, but not that practical for day to day use. Also water freezes at 273.16 K😉... or is it 273.15K? I can't remember.

273.16 is the triple point of water
273.15 is the freezing point of water

If everyone used it all the time you'd get used to it so then it would be practical for everyday use.

What's the difference between 273.15 and 32 or 0? They're just arbitrary numbers, bigger ones aren't necessarily scary or harder to remember if you had to. I stand with the lot of us that said Kelvin is the most intelligent system and UKHC's right, if you used it it would become practical.

The man's got a point. However, after living in Europe for a few years I have to say that Fahrenheit is more precise in terms of identifying the weather; the difference between, say, 12C and 13C is almost 2 entire degrees F (53.6-55.4), which makes it just a tiny bit harder to choose which hat to wear 😀.

Those are my thoughts on Fahrenheit. Most temperatures you need in daily life (like weather) are above 0 and each degree is more precise.

This is to me more alarming than the math genius at the top of the thread.

Unless of course you use the phrase 'all I need' in the HD Thoreau sense of the term, in which case you would be 100% correct...but then you wouldn't be using a computer 😎.

I'm sorry. You had to leave the country to buy a computer? Mine came shipped to me online but I could have easily driven an hour to the nearest Apple Store for it.

 

[Tom B.]

Can we organise a cull?

Imagine how much better the world would be if we could just hit a switch that would make everyone with an IQ of less than 100 disappear.

 

[Abstract]

I bet my IQ is like....200. I'm probably 2 times smarter than you. Hah!

 

[mrfrosty]

You see, that's the issue I have with most human beings. They only ever think in terms of human beings. The ecosystem relies on millions upon millions of other species. Global warming has the potential to be an extinction event of the kind that hasn't been seen for hundreds of millions of years, even surpassing the one that wiped out the dinosaurs, but humans can only consider the effect it will have on us.

We're stupid pathetic apes that should never have come down from the trees. The truly sad thing is we think we're clever.

Millions of people are starving to death right now. I just think something inevitable like global warming distracts the green do gooding types from their plight.

I disagree with humanity not being clever, sure we have screwed everything up but the last couple of hundred years have been a blast !!

 

[Counterfit]

I once heard a quick and simple conversion from C to F:

Take C, double it, then add 30.​

A couple of examples:

0 C --> 30 F (Actual is 32 F)​

100 C --> 230 F (Actual is 212 F)​

Both of these are pretty close for a simple approximation.

What I find funny, is even after all these years of living in countries that use C as their temperature measurement, I still think in terms of F. 😱

-5°C --> 40°F 😕

 

[dcr]

-5°C --> 40°F 😕

I sure hope you're making a joke re: the original article. 🙂

-5 * 2 + 30 =
-10 + 30 =
20

20 != 40

The accurate C->F conversion is
-5 * 9/5 + 32 =
-9 + 32 =
23

 

[shikimo]

Can we organise a cull?

Imagine how much better the world would be if we could just hit a switch that would make everyone with an IQ of less than 100 disappear.

This rather severe but kind of appealing statement underscores (one of) the problems with the concept of IQ: It is allegedly balanced so that 100 represents the average, which statistically implies that 50% of the population is on each side of 100. The scores cluster on either side of 100, decreasing in frequency on both directions. Thus, there's no way to say whether or not humanity is collectively more intelligent than at any other given time in human history, as the raw statistical value of 100 is subordinated its relative value. Although we can't know for sure, if we flip the switch today we would probably be eliminating 'raw' levels of intelligence that would've passed in years past.

Although, technical difficulties aside, I have to admit your switch would really clear up some space on the planet.😛

I'm sorry. You had to leave the country to buy a computer? Mine came shipped to me online but I could have easily driven an hour to the nearest Apple Store for it.

Wow...the depth and complexity of the sarcasm in this exchange has gotten too deep for me...I surrender. 🙂

 

[Counterfit]

I sure hope you're making a joke re: the original article. 🙂

No, it's just been forever since I took a math class. I must have been thinking -5^2. 😛

 

[EricNau]

What makes water so awesome...

You didn't just ask that, did you?

...I'll pretend that never happened.

 

[Phil A.]

Can we organise a cull?

Imagine how much better the world would be if we could just hit a switch that would make everyone with an IQ of less than 100 disappear.

Ah, but if that happened, wouldn't the 100 IQ point (i.e. the average) just move up and if you continued you'd just eliminate everyone on the planet eventually 😉

 

[119576]

No, it's just been forever since I took a math class. I must have been thinking -5^2. 😛

That would be 25. +30 would be 55. 😛

 

[Counterfit]

Well, I meant as far as the negative/positive. I never need to use this ****, I just count to 3, and then I subdivide. 😛

 

[koobcamuk]

This rather severe but kind of appealing statement underscores (one of) the problems with the concept of IQ...

Not only that, but if we get rid of all the retards, who will carry out those jobs that need to be done (as opposed to want to do). Apple store employees need to be found somewhere 😉

 

[119576]

Not only that, but if we get rid of all the retards, who will carry out those jobs that need to be done (as opposed to want to do). Apple store employees need to be found somewhere 😉

oooh. scathing!

I agree though. we'd have no lackeys to lay our bricks or plant our orchids.

I like how we're saying 'we' as if we're some sort of superorder. It makes me feel good.

We'd probably also have no barfights either...hm. And no opposition to our robotic engineering...It's a tough call.

 

[EricNau]

The accurate C->F conversion is
-5 * 9/5 + 32 =
-9 + 32 =
23

Why do people insist on using [C * 9/5 + 32 = F]?

Is 1.8 really that hard to remember?

 

[kcross]

What's the difference between 273.15 and 32 or 0? They're just arbitrary numbers, bigger ones aren't necessarily scary or harder to remember if you had to. I stand with the lot of us that said Kelvin is the most intelligent system and UKHC's right, if you used it it would become practical.

the Kelvin system is not arbitrary. Scales may always be arbitrary (as numbers are arbitrary), but the scale is based off absolute zero (a very unarbitrary concept.) or -273.15 C (strangely unarbitrary number i'd say).

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Why do people insist on using [C * 9/5 + 32 = F]?

Is 1.8 really that hard to remember?

oh the reasoning is simple. While 1.8 might be easy to remember. 5/9 for the conversion from F to C is easier to remember than its decimal number.

Reason I know it as 9/5 and 5/9 is really it only requires me remember one fraction that I can flip to go the other direction. The reason people use 9/5 is because of how much easier it is to remember the conversion the other direction.
Lastly the conversion for temperature is done more by common people than the others for length mass and volume. And generally speaking fractions are easier to work with than decimals

That and chances are it is the number they learned in grade school so it sticks with them.

 

[dcr]

9/5 is easier in practice, since 20% of the C temperatures you're likely to encounter will be evenly divisible by 5 and the conversion is simple to do in your head. With 1.8 there's much more thinking involved.

For example, 25 C, 9/5 * 25 is instantly refactorable to 25/5 * 9 = 5 * 9 = 45. 25 * 1.8 ? I'd have to write it down. 🙂

 

[EricNau]

oh the reasoning is simple. While 1.8 might be easy to remember. 5/9 for the conversion from F to C is easier to remember than its decimal number.

Reason I know it as 9/5 and 5/9 is really it only requires me remember one fraction that I can flip to go the other direction. The reason people use 9/5 is because of how much easier it is to remember the conversion the other direction.
Lastly the conversion for temperature is done more by common people than the others for length mass and volume. And generally speaking fractions are easier to work with than decimals

That and chances are it is the number they learned in grade school so it sticks with them.

It's very simple to convert from F to C using 1.8 as well:

[F - 32 / 1.8 = C]

This way, you only have to remember one number, not one fraction and its reciprocal. 😉

 

[siurpeeman]

oy, what a headache! if only the temp was always -40°, then we wouldn't have to bother with fahrenheit/celsius conversion.

 

[EricNau]

9/5 is easier in practice, since 20% of the C temperatures you're likely to encounter will be evenly divisible by 5 and the conversion is simple to do in your head. With 1.8 there's much more thinking involved.

For example, 25 C, 9/5 * 25 is instantly refactorable to 25/5 * 9 = 5 * 9 = 45. 25 * 1.8 ? I'd have to write it down. 🙂

OK, that makes sense, but I'm still going to stick with 1.8. 😛 🙂

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It's very simple to convert from F to C using 1.8 as well:

[F - 32 / 1.8 = C]

This way, you only have to remember one number, not one fraction and its reciprocal. 😉

you missed the other part. We learn the conversion when we are very young back when we are still learning more about fractions so it tends to stick with us. Also if you look in most forumal sheets the convertion factor is going to be C*9/5+32 so that adds to the part of way. It turns out to be a very pretty number in a fraction form and goes both ways.

Also it is a heck of a lot easier to convert by hand using a fraction than it by decimal. Only one number at a time to deal with. No long division no double digit multiplaction.

Fractions are honestly easier to work with if you are not using a calculator and if you are using one of those high in ones well it just looks pretty.

 

[Mac OS X Ocelot]

Wow...the depth and complexity of the sarcasm in this exchange has gotten too deep for me...I surrender. 🙂

I accept 😎

Why do people insist on using [C * 9/5 + 32 = F]?

Is 1.8 really that hard to remember?

For me at least, it's easier to multiply by nine then divide by five (and reverse for the reciprocal) than multiply by 1.8 in my head. Really, 1.8 and 9/5 have the same amount of digits, so what's the problem?

the Kelvin system is not arbitrary. Scales may always be arbitrary (as numbers are arbitrary), but the scale is based off absolute zero (a very unarbitrary concept.) or -273.15 C (strangely unarbitrary number i'd say).

The scale is what I was referring to. In an earlier post I said that Kelvin makes more sense since it's based on absolute zero and ragged on people that ragged on americans for not using Celsius when Celsius is no better than Fahrenheit (in fact, worse when dealing with weather, as per several earlier posts as well).

 

[Mac OS X Ocelot]

You didn't just ask that, did you?

...I'll pretend that never happened.

I'm just arguing that the fact that Celsius is based on water doesn't make it any less an arbitrary system (or any better a system) than Fahrenheit.