• lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Why call Imperial Units the American system? It’s the British Empire’s fault. And the UK still uses it. Like so much they say weird ass shit like “I weigh 12 stones.”

  • heh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    12 hours ago

    My favourite part of the metric system is that with it’s water weight being 1-1 with volume; measuring liquids is super easy with a scale.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    14 hours ago

    When I learned the consistency (synergy?) between metric measures, I thought that was so amazing.

    In the olden days sciencey types and engineers kept fact books listing such relations. They had a specific name that escapes me.

    Before handheld calculators, they also kept books of pre-calculated mathematical operations, so they were used to having numbers books around.

    • kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      “Better still learn mental math, you won’t always have an answer book in your pocket!” — 1500’s teachers

    • historicaldocuments@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      In the olden days sciencey types and engineers kept fact books listing such relations. They had a specific name that escapes me.

      Likely a “CRC”: CRC Standard Mathematical Tables, which is probably the same book as the pre-calculated mathematical operations you mentioned. It has a lot of good mathematical stuff in it such as basic formulas, trig functions, log tables, integral and differential functions, and formulas up through around Fourier analysis.

      If we were doing that thought exercise where you can take a “go bag” back in time to build science up more quickly, a CRC and a slide rule would probably be in mine. I’d probably throw in a prism and as compact of a microscope that uses a mirror as a light source as I could get away with; both for showing small stuff living in water and for showing what couldn’t be manufactured yet (depending on when I went back). I wouldn’t waste space in the bag for anything dealing with the imperial system.

  • rhinestones@europe.pubBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Grateful for my blessings and blessed to give back, I’m giving 35 grand to anyone who messages “GRACE” on Telegram @Georgestones12, I understand that many people are struggling with bills, and I want to help reduce that burden. It’s a season of love, kindness, and blessings.

  • BitUnWise@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    One mole of hydrogen-1 isn’t 1 gram because of the binding energy of protons and neutrons. One mole of hydrogen-1 is about 1.008g

    • sumsinj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You know that water being exactly 1kg and 1l is specific to one pressure and temperature combination?

      • BitUnWise@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Mole is a number of particles, not a volume. A mole of hydrogen-1 will always have the same mass regardless of temperature or pressure

        • Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          The point is that you do not have that precision. But it absolutely is good enough for pretty much everything. A 0.8 % error is often well below measurement error. Like in any mass balance in a chemical system, say a refinery or whatever. You can ignore argon and all other gases except N2 and O2 in air for the same reason in almost every application.

          But even if we apply the same logic, 1.008 is “incorrec” too, it is 1.00794.

          And that is incorrect too, not because of higher precision, but because of binding energy. Two separate hydrogen atoms (2 H) have slightly more mass than one hydrogen molecule (H₂) because forming the H–H chemical bond releases energy, reducing the system’s mass according via E= m*c² That extends to every single compound. They all have different atomic masses in them.

          I think the point is made.

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    17 hours ago

    We need to go deeper, america needs to come up with new time measurements too. Everything must go!

  • huquad@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 day ago

    True except for calorie. Metric typically uses Joules, which is good because it’s just the product of force (N) and distance units (m), instead of requiring a conversion factor.