What can you do with buttermilk?

[wiggin]

I think there's actually worthwhile points on both sides. As an engineer/scientists of course I use SI for work, and as an American I'm pretty well versed in conversions between SI and US units. But I do find some US units more useful than SI units for everyday things like cooking. The equivalent volume in mL for various cup-size amounts is kinda ridiculous (and unnecessarily precise); small amounts (e.g. tablespoons, teaspoons) are readily scaled into larger amounts in the US system but not SI units, cm are often unnecessarily fine for estimation but dm are too coarse, etc. For certain kinds of everyday measurements, US units end up being more likely to be integer numbers or simple fractions compared to SI units. That's not true of something arbitrary like miles vs. km, but it is true for things like volumes. Pounds and ounces are often more useful than kg and g as well, though not always.

I understand why countries shifted over wholesale to metric, and I think it makes sense. But it's not always inherently superior for all activities.

[Illusions]

Yes, my dear. The SI system is still standard, not because it's arbitrary, but because almost everyone save for some moronic countries have agreed to measure stuff in the same way. To argue about "circular reasoning" only shows that you do not understand why there are standards and why you have to pick some point and say: That's what we use as a base to derive everything else from.

Hi, I'm Khen, and I'm taking a lighthearted talk/debate about the usefulness and nature of measurements very personally, and you are a stupid head for disagreeing. *Pout*

...

I mean, just look at "mile". Do you mean: UK miles, US miles or nautical miles?

A Jupitarian mile obviously.

Just a thought, but what is your plan for describing a meter, to say...Aliens, who have no idea of how long it takes the Earth to make one complete revolution about its axis, or how long it takes the Earth to make a complete revolution around the sun, or that we decided to subdivide these units into common multiples of 2, 6, 12, and 15? It seems meter and feet are both completely worthless, and non-universal here.

Most of the SI units are sensible for describing everyday things even if I cannot use my body as a good proxy for most of them, and for instance I would personally prefer metric time but Communism collapsed before they could correct the Earth's rotation... What's the std of meter vs. average step and foot vs. average foot? That's how I visualize a meter. And the separation between your finger-tips with arms held out to the sides is also a rough approximation;

Its sensible to describe a meter as the distance light travels in a very small, fraction of a second? A fraction of time thats been carefully chosen so that distance is a meter? I understand that other SI units are probably far more intuitive, but Khen and I were discussing volumes, and lengths, which arose when Khen asked why his bastardized versions of cups didn't measure out exactly, or some multiple of, a cup.

I have a hard time visualizing distances as multiples of my own foot as that isn't how human locomotion actually works.

Which is why the Romans used the Pace and the Mile.

You just develop a back-bone for these things. That SI is also nicely usable for things scientific is a bonus, really, but it also lowers the barrier of entry between common day experience and science. Of course for example I tend to use things like electron volts in casual conversation, but the principle is the same and I can roughly work out the conversion between macroscopic energies and keV.

If you were dropped into an environment deprived of the modern conveniences of scientific measuring devices, would you still think it easy to use a meter and liters for measurement?

I'm not sure how you'd define non-arbitrary measures without first creating the new Soviet man who in addition to ideological purity always grew into the same physical dimensions. Seems like a lot of hassle to me.

What I was arguing is that lacking scientific measuring devices, one of the first, and most useful forms of measurement that are going to be developed in a culture (or in my example, a two person group stranded in the middle of nowhere), are going to be ones based off of commonly available things, and appendages are commonly available. They may not be the same, but its relatively easy to agree upon a base unit going from there.

[Nessus]

Its sensible to describe a meter as the distance light travels in a very small, fraction of a second? A fraction of time thats been carefully chosen so that distance is a meter? I understand that other SI units are probably far more intuitive, but Khen and I were discussing volumes, and lengths, which arose when Khen asked why his bastardized versions of cups didn't measure out exactly, or some multiple of, a cup.

I think you are confusing two things. The meter, as it is, is convenient around the other SI basic units as well as being something that is relatively simple for a human being to comprehend in their everyday life (the spread between two finger-tips, the fact that most people are around 1.7 meters tall, so on); it is defined by the speed of light because we are very precise at measuring the speed of light. I am sad to say that even with my level of measuring precision one tends to use sticks and rods to define real-world distances, and the accuracy of instrumentation for things that are too tiny for sticks. I have never once defined for myself the meter as some multiple of light's passing.

Which is why the Romans used the Pace and the Mile.

The romans also had population-wide lead poisoning and they sacrificed animals to their gods. As I said before, how would we go about making a non-arbitrary measurement system without human dimensional homogeneity? We no longer have kings to define our feet for us.

If you were dropped into an environment deprived of the modern conveniences of scientific measuring devices, would you still think it easy to use a meter and liters for measurement?

In such a scarcity situation, I would use whatever measurements I could muster given that I would be so deprived of food, supplies and cooking energy that the difference between a mile and a kilometre would be mostly trivial; it takes me 2 hours to walk there through the path with the slippery tree roots, that sort of business. Even if we assume I had access to materiel to create small power plants in streams using electro-magnetism, I would just try it out to see how much power I got out of the system, the order-of-magnitude-calculation for determining a good-sized water wheel etc would be just that, and I would either way expect errors of order of magnitude, not fifteen percent.

What I was arguing is that lacking scientific measuring devices, one of the first, and most useful forms of measurement that are going to be developed in a culture (or in my example, a two person group stranded in the middle of nowhere), are going to be ones based off of commonly available things, and appendages are commonly available. They may not be the same, but its relatively easy to agree upon a base unit going from there.

Which is a conversation useful in discussing television series and post-apocalyptic scenarios. Neither are inherently worth-while to our industrialized, technocratic civilization.

[Khendraja'aro]

Just a thought, but what is your plan for describing a meter, to say...Aliens, who have no idea of how long it takes the Earth to make one complete revolution about its axis, or how long it takes the Earth to make a complete revolution around the sun, or that we decided to subdivide these units into common multiples of 2, 6, 12, and 15? It seems meter and feet are both completely worthless, and non-universal here.

It's easy to describe a meter to aliens. Since it's based on a universal constant. You also don't use stuff like "revolutions of the Earth" since those are not constants.

Aliens which actually managed to travel here will most certainly also use universal constants as their zero-points.

[Illusions]

It's easy to describe a meter to aliens. Since it's based on a universal constant.

Its defined as the distance light travels in a certain fraction of a second. A second being 1/86,400 of a day, or one revolution of the Earth about its axis. So while it is based on a universal constant (the speed of light in vacuum), part of it is not (revolution of one particular planet about its axis of rotation). Going as far as a non-arbitrary description like Nessus mentioned, its the spread between two finger-tips, which is equally unhelpful to an entity unable to observe Earth or its inhabitants on a fine enough scale.

In fact, if this task is so easy, describe a meter to me in a manner that does not rely on knowledge that would be unique or only observable on Earth.

You also don't use stuff like "revolutions of the Earth" since those are not constants.

...again, used in defining what a meter is, since it includes seconds, and seconds are based off of "revolutions of the Earth".

Aliens which actually managed to travel here will most certainly also use universal constants as their zero-points.

Being unable to accurately measure the revolution of our planet about its axis of rotation would indicate that they have not traveled here. Again, speed of light in vacuum while a universal constant, does not mean that a meter is as well, since it uses non-universal constants (seconds) in its definition.

[wiggin]

Actually, seconds can be defined in terms of the radioactive decay of atoms, which (we think) is a universal constant. That being said, this discussion is pointless. The meter (and second) didn't used to be based on constants, nor were the foot and associated imperial units. But now they have defined conversions, so either one can be expressed in terms of universal constants. There's no advantage between one and another from that perspective. The relative advantage of SI units is that magnitude conversions are very straightforward and that certain constants are convenient (things like the convenient density of water at roughly room temperature). The relative advantage of imperial units is that at times the base units are more useful for certain everyday measurements; hardly all, but some.

On the balance of things, the SI system is undeniably superior in terms of utility. But given competing unit systems in places where both exist (like the US), it's often useful to pick and choose.

[Nessus]

All discussions are pointless as human beings are fundamentally unable to relate to one another, and all that is left for us is awaiting our personal deaths and on a generation scale the death of ourselves as a species. *shrug*

[GGT]

It's not a "fundamental" problem, but it IS a communication problem, Nessie.

One of my friends put her bag of yeast culture, meant to create yummy sourdough breads, on top of her fridge. But she didn't tell her cleaning lady it was an important science or baking project. Cleaning lady promptly threw the bag (full of future loaves of bread, plus the starter yeast) in the trash, because it looked like a bag full of expired gravy, or a forgotten baggie on top of the fridge.

Communication Errors don't mean humans are fundamentally unable to relate to/with one another.

[Nessus]

Nor did I say they did.

[GGT]

All discussions are pointless as human beings are fundamentally unable to relate to one another, and all that is left for us is awaiting our personal deaths and on a generation scale the death of ourselves as a species. *shrug*

[Nessus]

A statement made prior to me having information on your friend's plight, which through causality would suggest my statement was not motivated by said plight.

[GGT]

You clearly stated that "all discussions are pointless as human beings are fundamentally unable to relate to one another". *Shrugging* doesn't mean you can turn that into a meaningful discussion. Not if you think "all discussions are pointless". Make up your mind.

[Nessus]

That is a different position than your original one, which presented a physical impossibility. That is not a conversational issue, it's an ontological one.

[GGT]

I've never presented any physical impediment to mean human communications are impossible. And this IS a conversational issue, as much as we're having conversations on a forum. Where you "said":

All discussions are pointless as human beings are fundamentally unable to relate to one another, and all that is left for us is awaiting our personal deaths and on a generation scale the death of ourselves as a species. *shrug*

I disagree(d) with your statement. NO discussions are pointless, and human beings are NOT fundamentally unable to relate to one another. That's an absurd and outrageous statement. Pumping that into "awaiting our deaths as individuals or as a species" is even more absurd and preposterous. Saying that Death is all that's left for us goes well beyond nihilism.

[Nessus]

Your initial response to my statement was a singular anecdote about your personal life (or rather the personal life of a near-by person, but never mind). You presented this as an occasion mis-intepreted as an example of a fundamental break-down of human communication, or so it seemed. Given that I had no way of knowing about this particular human experience at the time I made my statement you were responding to, you seem to be suggesting that causality was somehow violated, as in order for your initial response to make any sort of sense, that singular example would have to be the basis of my statement. I am arguing that this is a physical impossibility.

[GGT]

While you knew full well that our own (very recent) personal communication "breakdown" wasn't exemplary of ALL human mis-communication? Nice try?

Given that I had no way of knowing about this particular human experience at the time I made my statement you were responding to, you seem to be suggesting that causality was somehow violated, as in order for your initial response to make any sort of sense, that singular example would have to be the basis of my statement. I am arguing that this is a physical impossibility.

Not really. The "basis" of your statements don't seem to connect to anyone else, let alone their 'human experiences. That's not a physical impossibility at all, given the internet age. You chose this thread to explain your Nihilism? A thread in General Chat about what to do with buttermilk? Really?

[Nessus]

It was a throw-away comment intended as a joke at wiggin's post. It is not an explanation of anything, just a statement of fact. The discussion around this pseudo-quote has been had a few times by now, I recall one go-around with Chaloobi, for instance. I am still unsure how your solitary example actually relates to anything said so far, so...You got me there?