Jump to content

OT: Weather (just weather)


JJFIVEOH

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

An easy one to remember is 28 is 82 (within small decimal points) so you can usually guestimate from there without even doing much math. 

Also, every degree of C is 1.8F.

If you move up 10C, you are moving up 18F.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fahrenheit: 0° is really really cold. 100° is really really hot. It is a great scale for the weather.

Celsius: 0° is kind of coldish. 100° is death to all living things. It is a sucky scale for weather.

There’s no reason to convert a number if you just use the better scale.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, SDS said:

Fahrenheit: 0° is really really cold. 100° is really really hot. It is a great scale for the weather.

Celsius: 0° is kind of coldish. 100° is death to all living things. It is a sucky scale for weather.

There’s no reason to convert a number if you just use the better scale.

This is an interesting post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SDS said:

Fahrenheit: 0° is really really cold. 100° is really really hot. It is a great scale for the weather.

Celsius: 0° is kind of coldish. 100° is death to all living things. It is a sucky scale for weather.

There’s no reason to convert a number if you just use the better scale.

idk, don't you think it's weird for the whole world to do one method, based on 0-100, much like the rest of number usage in a decimal system and one country hanging on to an archaic system?

Anyway, I was also going to say -40 is -40, that's where the two scales meet on the bottom end. As for the weather, it's easy, anything 30 and up is hot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

idk, don't you think it's weird for the whole world to do one method, based on 0-100, much like the rest of number usage in a decimal system and one country hanging on to an archaic system?

Anyway, I was also going to say -40 is -40, that's where the two scales meet on the bottom end. As for the weather, it's easy, anything 30 and up is hot. 

So you agree with SDS.

The metric system, without question, is better for everything else, based on the 0-100 that you mention,... except the weather.

Farenheit 0-100 is just better when talking about the weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, SwampD said:

So you agree with SDS.

The metric system, without question, is better for everything else, based on the 0-100 that you mention,... except the weather.

Farenheit 0-100 is just better when talking about the weather.

Not really. You're just used to it. Honestly I'm old enough to be familiar with both systems . I still say I weigh 175 pounds and have no idea off the top of my head how many kilos that is. I convert to pounds. I'm 6'1". Not whatever in meters or centimeters. But, although I know both temperature systems I think of the weather in celsius automatically and when I am on an American channel and see weather maps with 50s and 60s or whatever I have to think and calculate what that means. Also driving, totally used to klms and klms/hr. and often end up speeding on U.S. highways when I'm across the border.

(back in those days we were allowed to cross, way back in the olden days.......or so it feels like lol) 

So short answer, no, I think it's just what you're used to. 

and in any event, by any scale, it was too f'n hot. Finally breaking tonight. Should only be about 27/80 tomorrow. Hopefully with a breeze too. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

The United States has been on the metric system for oneimportant thing since 1790. Any guesses? 

It's probably something boring like the weight of gold in grams as measure of then gold-backed currency. For myself, I propose a guess that Benjamin Franklin was flying a key from a kite, got struck by lightning, measured it in 1.21 gigawatts, and that's when he drew the diagram of the flux capacitor which is what makes time travel possible. That, or the use of parsecs as a system of... <mumbling something incoherent>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DarthEbriate said:

It's probably something boring like the weight of gold in grams as measure of then gold-backed currency. For myself, I propose a guess that Benjamin Franklin was flying a key from a kite, got struck by lightning, measured it in 1.21 gigawatts, and that's when he drew the diagram of the flux capacitor which is what makes time travel possible. That, or the use of parsecs as a system of... <mumbling something incoherent>

Lol, you were so close yet so far away in your first part. It’s like such an obvious thing but people don’t think of it that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Alexander Hamilton and the money system. Based on 10s. That was a break from the Pound and shillings and such. 

Decimal currency, yeah.  Metric system though?  The French were just starting to think about it in 1790.  And a decimal calendar along with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Decimal currency, yeah.  Metric system though?  The French were just starting to think about it in 1790.  And a decimal calendar along with it.

Hmmm....  Yes. I think I'd have to also question our currency being metric because it appears to based on a decimal system with the primary dollar unit on a scale of 100 instead of 10s.

Now, with a cent (centimeter) it makes perfect sense (ha! homonyms!) because century/100 and all that. But formally, we'd be calling those centidollars. And dimes should be decidollars. And instead of dropping Hamiltons we'd be dropping decadollars.

Kilodollars for 1,000s. All of our veteran players would be signing seven-figure megadollar contracts instead of million dollar contracts.

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

idk, don't you think it's weird for the whole world to do one method, based on 0-100, much like the rest of number usage in a decimal system and one country hanging on to an archaic system?

Anyway, I was also going to say -40 is -40, that's where the two scales meet on the bottom end. As for the weather, it's easy, anything 30 and up is hot. 

Thing is with that archaic system, when doing conversions & calculations (especially in engineering) you don't end up with answers that are off 1 or 2 orders of magnitude when not noticing that things were in centimeters when you were expecting either millimeters or meters.

Will stick with the archaic system.  😉

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Thing is with that archaic system, when doing conversions & calculations (especially in engineering) you don't end up with answers that are off 1 or 2 orders of magnitude when not noticing that things were in centimeters when you were expecting either millimeters or meters.

Will stick with the archaic system.  😉

I'm a retired engineer so I totally get this, but you do realize it's the exact opposite perspective up here. Imported American products usually have converted specs, but when they don't, mistakes can definitely be made. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Just to cap this off, I heard today that in Lytton, way up north here, it was hotter than it's EVER been in Las Vegas. That's just wrong. 

And now the whole town is on fire. Very sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Maybe I remember that one wrong. Thought biographer Ron Chernow made that point about Hamilton 

Oh, Hammy (any relation to Paul?) may have, with currency, and Chernow may have been right.  I've no idea.  I suspect that it's correct.  But the metric system, the decimal calendar, and the decimal clock (yes they tried) were borne from the French Revolution, which was in 1789, and it took them a few years to get all of it going.  There's no way that a decimal American dollar, if it began in 1790, was based upon a French metric system.

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

I'm a retired engineer so I totally get this, but you do realize it's the exact opposite perspective up here. Imported American products usually have converted specs, but when they don't, mistakes can definitely be made. 

We still serve real pours here, though.  In all kinds of weather.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DarthEbriate said:

Hmmm....  Yes. I think I'd have to also question our currency being metric because it appears to based on a decimal system with the primary dollar unit on a scale of 100 instead of 10s.

Now, with a cent (centimeter) it makes perfect sense (ha! homonyms!) because century/100 and all that. But formally, we'd be calling those centidollars. And dimes should be decidollars. And instead of dropping Hamiltons we'd be dropping decadollars.

Kilodollars for 1,000s. All of our veteran players would be signing seven-figure megadollar contracts instead of million dollar contracts.

Wouldn’t that be the dollaric system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...