In order to continue this discussion we must all understand the 3 main differences between imperial and metric systems:
- The metric system defines each unit as a function of other units. For example: A liter is 0.1m x 0.1m x 0.1m . In imperial, each measurement can be defined by analogue, but historically they are unrelated.
- The metric system is base-10, just like the number system we all use to count. In imperial each measurement has a different base: base-12, base-16, base-5280, etc.
- The actual scalar length of the meter is more or less arbitrary, just like the inch or pound. On Earth or on a different planet, neither is better.
Summing up: The strength of the metric system is not in the defined length of the meter, but in its base-10 calculation system. The meter might as well be an inch long, or the gram may weigh an ounce, it doesn't matter.
So, discussing discussing whether a gallon (US or Imp?) of water is this many fluid ounces or weighs that many ounces is totally unrelated to how much a gallon or ounce actually is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
If someone ever invents a system that actually is rational, then we can talk. But the metric system isn't rational at all: it's just irrational in a different way.
|
And what would this rational system have/not have, which would differ it from the imperial or metric systems?
Or by rational do you mean rational numbers? This would mean all measurements must be a rational number (fraction of whole numbers), so there could not be lengths or volumes equal to, say, 'pi' or 'square root of 2'?
