If you've ever wondered why most of the world switched to Metric ...

[godlameroso]

What are you talking about? Pi has been known about for thousands of years - well before the metric system.

Pi is 3.14 and so forth if you measure it in decimal. That is, the ratio between an imaginary line, and an imaginary circle is 3.14....... How else can you think of that ratio in a more simplified way than 1:3.14......= ratio of a perfect imaginary line and a perfect imaginary circle. These imaginary objects don't even exist in nature, only in our minds as abstractions. So yes it makes sense that we would know about these things for thousands of years, humans have common abstractions because we have common brains and ways to perceive, although all perceptions function in unique ways.

The important part is the relationship of the line to the circle, which leads us again to more circular logic while talking about circles. Maybe there are no circles and it's really just spirals.

Er, yeah.

I'm out of here. I thought this was a serious discussion but you're just rambling about nonsense.

What doesn't make sense about what I said? Where do you see perfect circles or perfect lines in nature? It's hard to talk about irrational things like pi or "normal", because it's not something we experience.

If we want to go back to the original topic, the world never switched to Metric. Metric is a tool to measure, just like Imperial. The measurements are abstractions, as we've pointed out, they are rooted in nonsensical arbitrary values. Both systems have their uses, one is not better than the other. PS All mil-spec fasteners are SAE.

Are they useful? Sure to a point, and beyond that point it's nonsense, as you point out. At which point do nano-meters become nonsense as a measuring tool? When you're measuring the width of the grand canyon? Where do meters become nonsense, when you're measuring the clearance of the rod bearing to the rod journal?

If you want a serious discussion I require payment up-front.

[godlameroso]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQCU36pkH7c

Nothing personal, mostly because I love this clip, but my goodness this thread has turned a corner.

Tao Te Ching chapter 3.

If you overesteem great men,
people become powerless.
If you overvalue possessions,
people begin to steal.
The Master leads
by emptying people's minds
and filling their cores,
by weakening their ambition
and toughening their resolve.
He helps people lose everything
they know, everything they desire,
and creates confusion
in those who think that they know.

[nzjrs]

Yes god, it is easy to confuse wisdom with the retreat to higher levels of abstraction.

We are at 2+2=5 levels of discourse here.

Edit:

(2+2=5 discourse is a thing, google it. Everyone has made ever version of gods argument above. It was tedious then and remains tedious now)

[Billzilla]

The measurements are abstractions, as we've pointed out, they are rooted in nonsensical arbitrary values

Not so for the metric (SI) system - A lot of it is based on water.
To state the obvious, one tonne of water is a one metre cube. That dilutes down to cc's of water that weigh 1 gram, etc.

[coaster]

If water is placed uncontained in zero gravity it will eventually form a perfect sphere.
The orbits of the planets are spirals in a spacial sense as the sun orbits the centre of the galaxy as we orbit the sun, but orbits are often ellipses, so not a useful analogy.
I will never dare to challenge the great thinkers who discovered the methods of modern math,
Pythagoras is about my limit, i never reached Calculus.

[Just_a_fan]

If water is placed uncontained in zero gravity it will eventually form a perfect sphere.
The orbits of the planets are spirals in a spacial sense as the sun orbits the centre of the galaxy as we orbit the sun, but orbits are often ellipses, so not a useful analogy.
I will never dare to challenge the great thinkers who discovered the methods of modern math,
Pythagoras is about my limit, i never reached Calculus.

A ripple in water will be a circle too.
Pi is found in all sorts of places. If it was a human invention, as suggested previously, it wouldn't be an transendental irrational number would it? Why have a number that you can never know exactly but turns up in so many fields? You can't ever get a truly exact answer to many formulae because they involve pi.

Of course, irrational numbers other than pi also crop up everywhere.

[coaster]

Just over half of pi is 1.6, this is considered a mathematical expression of the patterns in nature yes? Fabonicci's golden ratio something or other?
Irrational number, yes?

[DChemTech]

The measurements are abstractions, as we've pointed out, they are rooted in nonsensical arbitrary values

Not so for the metric (SI) system - A lot of it is based on water.
To state the obvious, one tonne of water is a one metre cube. That dilutes down to cc's of water that weigh 1 gram, etc.

Originally, maybe. Currently, they are specified in terms of natural constants, e.g. the speed of light, plank constant, and oscillation frequency of a certain transition in ceasium-133. One meter cubed of water is 998.2 kilogram, not exactly a tonne (and that is at stp of course, at other conditions, it would deviate)

As for Pi, it's value is an exact mathematical definition, that indeed pops up in many, many (idealized) natural processes. Luckily, the mathematics of does not hinge on our poor ability of exact quantification, so it really is an irrational number - even if any practical measurement of it may not be due to the finite resolution of our methods (and for that matter, finite resolution of space itself). Reality is just a poor approximation of pure mathematical concepts.

[djos]

Pretty darn good video here on the topic;

[Tommy Cookers]

when young people talk in 'kays' ....
is that ....
amounts of distance ?
amounts (1000s or 1024s?) of money ?
amounts of 'weight' ?
amounts of speed ?

the metric 'system' is impractical as practical units were not prioritised via distinct names - the opposite was done
it was invented because eg a Sicilian mile was different to a Tuscan mile (heard of the Mille Miglia ?)
so we now have no distinct names for the distinct things that most need most of the time
and eg the military invented 'klick' terminology for this reason

the metric 'system' exports difficulty to the general population instead of leaving it where it belonged
fortunately global nautical and air navigation retains systems based on their distinctive practical units

[djos]

when young people talk in 'kays' ....
is that ....
amounts of distance ?
amounts (1000s or 1024s?) of money ?
amounts of 'weight' ?
amounts of speed ?

Context is everything.

K's will be speed or distance, depending on the context. Sometimes distance will be called Klicks, but context tells ppl what you mean if you use K's for distance. eg the pub is 10k's away. It's just obvious.

Weight is usually shortened to "kilo's" in speech (I've never heard "k's" used for weight ever).

No one uses "k's" for money or anything remotely similar that I'm aware of. It's all X dollars / Euros or slang versions. eg "bucks".

the metric 'system' is impractical as practical units were not prioritised via distinct names - the opposite was done
it was invented because eg a Sicilian mile was different to a Tuscan mile (heard of the Mille Miglia ?)
so we now have no distinct names for the distinct things that most need most of the time
and eg the military invented 'klick' terminology for this reason

the metric 'system' exports difficulty to the general population instead of leaving it where it belonged
fortunately global nautical and air navigation retains systems based on their distinctive practical units

Honestly, this just tells me you are an American who doesnt use metric in daily life.

[Jolle]

when young people talk in 'kays' ....
is that ....
amounts of distance ?
amounts (1000s or 1024s?) of money ?
amounts of 'weight' ?
amounts of speed ?

Context is everything.

K's will be speed or distance, depending on the context. Sometimes distance will be called Klicks, but context tells ppl what you mean if you use K's for distance. eg the pub is 10k's away. It's just obvious.

Weight is usually shortened to "kilo's" in speech (I've never heard "k's" used for weight ever).

No one uses "k's" for money or anything remotely similar that I'm aware of. It's all X dollars / Euros or slang versions. eg "bucks".

the metric 'system' is impractical as practical units were not prioritised via distinct names - the opposite was done
it was invented because eg a Sicilian mile was different to a Tuscan mile (heard of the Mille Miglia ?)
so we now have no distinct names for the distinct things that most need most of the time
and eg the military invented 'klick' terminology for this reason

the metric 'system' exports difficulty to the general population instead of leaving it where it belonged
fortunately global nautical and air navigation retains systems based on their distinctive practical units

Honestly, this just tells me you are an American who doesnt use metric in daily life.

“K” is slang for “a thousand/kilo”. it’s a 150k (euro) sports car”. Or, 10k (meters) to the pub, 20k (bit/s) modem. Not an official name.

[djos]

No one in Australia says 10k if they mean meters.

[nzjrs]

No one in Australia says 10k if they mean meters.

Really? In NZ I would say he lives 10k down the road.

[djos]

No one in Australia says 10k if they mean meters.

Really? In NZ I would say he lives 10k down the road.

Maybe that's because NZ is so small? In Aus, 10k down the road is 10 kilometres.