Quote:
Originally Posted by Piwoslaw
In order to continue this discussion we must all understand the 3 main differences between imperial and metric systems:
|
Oh, I do understand them quite well. I have, after all, been using the metric system pretty much all my life, in the scientific areas where it's useful.
Quote:
|
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 irrationally defines some units in terms of other units to which they are unrelated. As for instance the gram being the mass of one cc of water. Why water rather than mercury or hydrogen? Purely arbitrary.
Quote:
|
The metric system is base-10, just like the number system we all use to count.
|
We
don't use base 10 all the time, though. Lots of us use binary and hexadecimal (and not just for computing: halves and quarters are handy in carpentry), base 12 is used in packaging* and for times (as is base 60), base 360 for angles...
*Indeed, I think base 12 has the best claim to a
rational system, since it works with geometry.
Quote:
|
In imperial each measurement has a different base: base-12, base-16, base-5280, etc.
|
Because those bases work well for the particular task, rather than trying to shoehorn everything into decimal. Though I do think it would make sense to redefine the mile as 6000 feet (nautical mile), or 1000 paces...
Quote:
|
The strength of the metric system is not in the defined length of the meter, but in its base-10 calculation system.
|
For some purposes, yes, as for when you're doing scientific calculations using powers of 10. But for everyday use, you create confusion with a large set of prefixes applied to the basic unit. And verbosity: inch vs centimeter, mile vs kilometer, pound vs kilogram - one syllable words vs three or four syllables.