Do Brits still measure their weight in stones?
4 Likes
Yes we weigh ourselves in stones and pounds but most other things in kilos and grammes. However if I need to calculate my BMI I have to convert to kg.
1 Like
Stone is an aspect of imperial measurement that did not take hold over here (at least AFAIK). But some people are used to it, and continue to use it, and it is possible that by rounding off to stone, some people would not have as much mental anguish over their body weight fluctuating by a pound or two or ten here and there.
I kind of get a kick out of people arguing over measurement units. Personally, I feel that some units are better suited to certain situations. As long as the unit is defined, it is pretty darned easy to convert to another, especially if you have a google box. It is so easy to convert that it makes zero sense to me not to have automatic conversion / unit selection / dual-marked gauges anywhere that is applicable.
My older vehicles have speedometer dials with both MPH and KPH marked. Girlfriendâs Prius lets you change the digital display to display MPH or KPH. Thermometer readouts are changed at the push of a button. Have been able to punch in mixed units in Adobe products for a long time.
I like fahrenheit for a several reasons, but mostly experience: I know what 100°f feels like, and I know what -20°f feels like, and I can guess with some degree of accuracy as to the current temperature that I can feel.
I have had some confusion surrounding celsius (or was that centigrade?)
I think that the following excerpt sums it up nicely:
However, just because certain metric measurements are superior to traditional measurements, this doesnât mean that every part of the metric system is superior. Some purists will argue that we should adopt an all-or-nothing approach concerning the metric system, but it doesnât have to be that way. We, as free people, are certainly capable of accepting the parts of the metric system that simplify our lives and rejecting those that would make things more difficult. -source
This fella has a similar argument
http://thevane.gawker.com/fahrenheit-is-a-better-temperature-scale-than-celsius-1691707793
6 Likes
I donât know anybody that rounds their weight to the nearest stone. It is always so many stone and so many pounds here. I know weight is in pounds in the US but it means nothing to me unless I divide by 14, which isnât the easiest mental arithmetic.
But I donât think imperial units are ever better than metric because I canât calculate anything with them without involving lots of constants that I donât know without looking them up. The SI system gets rid of all the arbitrary constants created by imperial units and just leaves the fundamental constants of the universe.
1 Like
Iâm going to pull a âyouâ and argue just for the heck of it. 
Only simpler if you think in terms of Base 10.
11 Likes
I have certainly heard people say things like âI weigh about 11 stoneâ plenty of times, but have admittedly spent far less time in England than you have. Maybe there really is no good reason to use stone, other than cultural history. Culture vs. Science is a different (painful) discussion.
Equations are where metric shines. Expressing that in understandable, relatable ways⌠not so much.
I would argue that the SI system is based, arbitrarily, on the number of fingers that we have, and that there are better systems, that could be easier to learn, and which would still be in line with the so-called âfundamental constants of the universeâ (math in general: fundamental. Arabic symbols expressing numbers: arbitrary).
I had to take a math class as part of my University graduation requirements. I took a class called something like âcomputer mathâ. It was all hexidecimal, and was perhaps the single most understandable* math class that I had ever taken. (*understandable to me)
What do you think of the Dozenal System?
9 Likes
I think the base you count in is orthogonal to the units. Yes a foot is 12 inches but then there are 3 in a yard and we donât use 1/12 of inch we use 1/16ths etc, so what base is it?
SI sub units are always powers of 10, imperial are random.
The main advantage of SI though is scientific formulas are simpler. For example if I know my weight in kg I can calculate how much energy it would need to lift me up 1m, or if I dissipate the waste heat from a laser tube into a bucket of water I can calculate how quickly the temperature will rise if I know the capacity in litres. I can do these things without looking up random constants.
1 Like
Already in the hopper is a setting to let you pick preferred units.
22 Likes
Awesome. This will definitely be helpful when trying to find settings for other materials as they are almost all in mm/s
2 Likes
I think Metric is a snap. One system that works across all disciplines.
Iâm surprised Americans have a problem with it, as much as they whine and complain about fractions in math class. Metric avoids that issue altogether.
American engineers and machinists have at least taken a step towards normalcy with decimal inches.
American architects use feet/fractional inches.
American civil engineers use decimal feet!
The only real issue with any of these is converting (or relating) one to another, and thatâs more an issue of upbringing or just dealing with the numbers enough that youâre used to doing it all the time. My past employer was such a situation where I had to do these conversions on nearly daily basis, but growing up in Science classes, woodshop classes, metal shop classes, etc. that was not a foreign thing to me at all.
4 Likes
Americans donât have a problem with the metric system. Unfortunately a decent percentage of voters have a problem with any change, and the majority that think the metric system is a better way donât care enough for it to be a priority. So the politicians went after the vocal minority votes.
12 Likes
Inches and feet are a good size for measuring. The gap between a centimeter and a meter is too big. If decimeters were marked on my rulers they would be handy too, but they never are (WHY?). No skin off my back, I will continue to use both metric and imperial measurements. Did I just measure 2â 1" .5cm? Sure, because all are marked on my ruler and that half-centimeter mark was in the perfect spot.
There is a difference between having a problem with Metric measurements in general, and being told that the way you do things (A) is wrong, and the way that they do it (B) is right, when both ways A and B work, as do ways C, D, E, etc.
Which makes me think of this alternate method of learning multiplication, which would have been way easier for me (being a very visual person) to learn.
Variety is the spice of life.*
*Except for nut and bolt sizes.
Having to keep two sets of sockets and wrenches is just annoying. I am perfectly fine with ditching imperial altogether in terms of socket size.
16 Likes
I want âwifflesâ !
Wiffle[edit]
A Wiffle, also referred to as a WAM for Wiffle (ball) Assisted Measurement, is 89 millimeters (3.5 inches) in diameter (the variety of Wiffle Ball the same size as the 11" circumference variety of softball). It is frequently used by marine biologists as a size reference in photos to measure corals and other objects.[21][22] The spherical shape makes it omnidirectional and perfect for taking a speedy measurement, and the open design also allows it to avoid being crushed by the intense water pressure. Wiffle balls are a much cheaper alternative to using two reference lasers, which often pass straight through gaps in thin corals.
A scientist on the research vessel EV Nautilus is credited with pioneering the technique, and the phrase â[so many] wiffles longâ soon followed, as most people have some idea of how big a wiffle ball is.
19 Likes
I love math and I decided to finally look up common core math and see what it was that they were trying to teach (not really a fan of the techniques at all). That lead me down a number of rabbit trails that lead me to learning several different ways of multiplying large numbers. I was fascinated by the Japanese method that you describe here as well as the Lattice method.
7 Likes
You and just about every math teacher out there.
6 Likes
I think with numbers there is a lot of baby duck imprinting going on here that severely biases our ability to adapt to alternate strategies. I myself canât even begin to appreciate other methods of calculating than how I learned them as a child.
6 Likes
I understand the reasoning they give, âtrying to help the student think in mathematical terms,â But coming from a family of teachers, I also know the powers that be are more often than not completely full of it and will undoubtedly change course in a few years leaving all the students that learned âNew Mathâ to fend for themselves. Just a personal opinion, but I donât think anyone should be allowed a position of power within the state city, state or national education agencies who donât have at least 20 years classroom experience. Too many people who work on theory and donât have a clue what the real world classroom is even like. In Texas our governor appointed a home schooler as head of our public education system. Thatâs why we only allow our state government to get together every other year, it keeps them from screwing things up that much faster. Side point: nothing against home schooling, I myself was home schooled for a couple of years, but since my mom was a certified teacher, that may not count - love it anyway. done with lessons by 11 and off to the fishing hole by noon. But I still wouldnât put someone in charge of public education who never interacted or worked in it in the first placeâŚ
I will now step off my soap box 
16 Likes
The strange way we do school systems with so much local control and school boards run by non-educators is fascinating. And the local funding of schools. And the disparity of education levels by demographics.
Donât get me going about creative spelling. I come from the English wars side of the equation. I certainly am on your side regarding fads in mathematical teaching and teaching in general.
3 Likes
And more than a little insane. And donât get me going on school funding. We act like every child matters, but only the children in wealthy communities have far more spent on them by the state and federal government, and Texas is one of the worst offendersâŚ
4 Likes
Depending on where you are. Here in NJ itâs the worst 7? districts that have the highest, by far, spending per child. I wouldnât mind if it got good results, but itâs been decades and theyâve gotten worse results as time goes on.
1 Like