Imperial vs Metric
- Thread starter billw
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Cabinetman
Established Member
I got a metal metre rule from wicks a few years ago and on one side it had metric at the top and imperial at the bottom and if you turned it over it was reversed, it was really handy for somebody like me that uses both and which ever is nearest is handy. No they stopped making it. Doh!
Temperature wise I use centigrade for low temperatures as in, its -5 outside and when it’s warm it’s 84 Fahrenheit.
Temperature wise I use centigrade for low temperatures as in, its -5 outside and when it’s warm it’s 84 Fahrenheit.
Peri
Established Member
It's only very recently that I saw a carpenters roll up rule that only had metric on it - it surprised me so much I actually made a point of mentioning it to a colleague
Cabinetman
Established Member
And in America, it’s very easy to buy a roll up rule with only Imperial on it.
Felix
Established Member
Then of course you have:That's confused me so much I'm not even sure if you're joking or not.
Really reminded me of that famous Terry Pratchett footnote:
Two farthings = One Ha'penny.
Two ha'pennies = One Penny.
Three pennies = A Thrupenny Bit.
Two Thrupences = A Sixpence.
Two Sixpences = One Shilling, or Bob.
Two Bob = A Florin.
One Florin and one Sixpence = Half a Crown.
Four Half Crowns = Ten Bob Note.
Two Ten Bob Notes = One Pound (or 240 pennies).
One Pound and One Shilling = One Guinea.
The British resisted decimalized currency for a long time because they thought it was far too complicated."
Lady Godiva £5
**** and hen £10
A score £20
Bag of sand/large £1000
Felix
Established Member
I think having the ability to work in both is useful particularly if you repair old furniture.
Also, I think the imperial measuring system is more accurate if a bit more confusing. If you take an inch it's quite easy to measure to the 32nd, but try measuring to the 1/2 mm - that is if you don't go cross-eyed trying to read the scale
Also, I think the imperial measuring system is more accurate if a bit more confusing. If you take an inch it's quite easy to measure to the 32nd, but try measuring to the 1/2 mm - that is if you don't go cross-eyed trying to read the scale
Peri
Established Member
Don't forget ponies and a monkey 
rogersnowden
New member
60 minutes in the hour, 60 seconds in the minute! Based on the Babylonian number system which used 60 as its base. Divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, and 30.
Remember tons, cwt, stones, pounds, ounces (and troy ounces and avoirdupois, whatever they were)?
Rods poles perches acres furlongs chains?
Remember tons, cwt, stones, pounds, ounces (and troy ounces and avoirdupois, whatever they were)?
Rods poles perches acres furlongs chains?
Sheffield Tony
Ghost of the disenchanted
Actually there is one good argument for imperial here. If you have the sort of rule that has some areas in 1/16s, some in 1/20s, some in 1/12s etc, the chances are anything you want to measure will be close enough to an integer number of one or the other of them, but the scales are not so fine you can't read/count them. I can't really read 0.5mm graduations without glasses and good lighting. And as for the rule I have with 1/100" graduations - who can use that confidently ?
I heard somewhere about a danish carpenter who gave a gift to an american carpenter. He gave him a rule with danish inches. I remember that it took a while for the american to realize why he got his measurements wrong. The danish inch is 26.15 mm.
Something like this:
https://www.hultafors.com/products/folding_rules/H0005-folding-rule-82/79353
Something like this:
https://www.hultafors.com/products/folding_rules/H0005-folding-rule-82/79353
Last edited:
Droogs
Not the Sharpest Moderator in the box
It is interesting that the original numeral system used by human beings (as far as we know) was the Summerian system on which the Babylonians based all their mathematics on and that is base 60. The main reason that is postulated for this is that it allows astronomical observations (based on the Great Year - one complete revolution of our galaxy about it's axis) to be more exact and is the basis of nearly all measuring systems that have ever been used. The exception being Decimal.
Yojevol
Clocking on
It's a pity that the Man Up There, ie, the Director of Evolution, didn't foresee all the arithmetic we would be getting up to. If He had He would have given us 2 X 6 digits.
Sheffield Tony
Ghost of the disenchanted
I'm a computer systems engineer. So I can can count to 1023 on my fingers. What's not to like about binary ?
Felix
Established Member
It could be 1024 - just depends whether you are using the natural or integer numbering schemes - which you haven't declared (Ex sysadmin) - still running linux <lol>
Here's a great example of the lunacy of imperial (at 3 minutes in case YouTube doesn't take you straight there)
The guy is a master craftsman, but why on earth would anyone do a calculation like this, instead of
3096 / 16 = 193.5
3667 / 15 = 244.5
The guy is a master craftsman, but why on earth would anyone do a calculation like this, instead of
3096 / 16 = 193.5
3667 / 15 = 244.5
Felix
Established Member
This is interesting in the context of imperial and metric:
It was posted by Peri in the General Chat (Off-Topic) forum
The book is copyright free and you can download it from:
www.filefactory.com/file/4ff2amdb1f5y/n/J._P._Law_-_The_Beginners_Guide_to_Fitting_1935.pdf
If you will examine a rule you will see that it is easy to
measure inches and fractions, such as l ½ in., 2 1\- in., or 3 in.
Sometimes, however, it is necessary to measure in decimal
dimensions, auch as 1.620 in. This generally throws a beginner
into confusion which a little more knowledge will dispel.
Since rule measurement can only be approximate, we use
the nearest dimensions on the rule to the size we require.
One point six twenty (1.620) = one inch, six-tenths of an
inch, and two hundredths of an inch.
Now 2/100 = 1/50 and as 1/50 divisions are marked on
the rule, we may measure as in Fig. 11.
Similarly, it should be remembered that one-twentieth of
an inc.h = .050 in., or fifty thousandths of an inch. Thus,
if a measurement of 4.350 in. is required, this also may be
directly measured.
The decimal equivalent of fractional sizes 1/64 in., 1/32 in.,
3/64 in., up to 1 in. should be memorised by the student. A
mastery of these conversions will well repay the little trouble
required.
It was posted by Peri in the General Chat (Off-Topic) forum
The book is copyright free and you can download it from:
www.filefactory.com/file/4ff2amdb1f5y/n/J._P._Law_-_The_Beginners_Guide_to_Fitting_1935.pdf
If you will examine a rule you will see that it is easy to
measure inches and fractions, such as l ½ in., 2 1\- in., or 3 in.
Sometimes, however, it is necessary to measure in decimal
dimensions, auch as 1.620 in. This generally throws a beginner
into confusion which a little more knowledge will dispel.
Since rule measurement can only be approximate, we use
the nearest dimensions on the rule to the size we require.
One point six twenty (1.620) = one inch, six-tenths of an
inch, and two hundredths of an inch.
Now 2/100 = 1/50 and as 1/50 divisions are marked on
the rule, we may measure as in Fig. 11.
Similarly, it should be remembered that one-twentieth of
an inc.h = .050 in., or fifty thousandths of an inch. Thus,
if a measurement of 4.350 in. is required, this also may be
directly measured.
The decimal equivalent of fractional sizes 1/64 in., 1/32 in.,
3/64 in., up to 1 in. should be memorised by the student. A
mastery of these conversions will well repay the little trouble
required.
Last edited:
I've been desperately trying to resist this but I just can't.
You do realise that you're implying that the Babylonians had not only a grasp of the existence of the Milky Way but also the fact that it rotates about its centre and that that idea is bread and butter to the people who are convinced that such knowledge shows that we were (possibly still are) visited by aliens?
It's enough to make you set up your workbench in a crop circle.
Anyway, I'm not sure that I'd want to have intergalactic contact with somebody who doesn't get inches.
Droogs
Not the Sharpest Moderator in the box
@Andy Kev.
I am totally agnostic with regard to whether there are human or non human beings that reside on some other ball of dirt whizzing about the multiverse and if they have been here or not. I see no definitive proof either way, so I do not know.
Having had a total obsession about the Sumerians (since I played the "Royal game of Ur" and Indianna Jones as a child), Akkadians and the growth of civilizations in the fertile crescent to the point that my entire secondary school subject choices were focused on being able to get to UofC and their archeology program (I just missed out on a scholarship) and unfortunately my parents could not afford to pay, so I ended up taking the shilling instead. I also had a childhood in which biblical history was rammed into my head. This only increased my desire to learn about the ancient world. I soon managed to divest myself of the superstitions but never the interest in the cradle of civilization or ti's developement.
There are a growing number of respected and acknowledged experts in various fields of academic study who are not interested in little green men at all but are postulating that in certain areas previous societies had a level of knowledge about Astronomy and Mathematics at least on a par ours as of the 1800s. Maths doesn't lie and when you look at the numbers surrounding many of the ancient worlds relics they show an amazing level of sophistication in those areas.
It is unfortunate that so many people do not believe that we human beings are capable of such thinking so long ago. More and more evidence is being found and explained from further in our past thatn ever before thanks to technology and our own growing knowledge, that shows the possibility that our ancestors weren't the troglodites they are portrayed to be. Known recorded history is only 6k to 8k years old and yet we have physical evidence of astronomically based super structures all around the world that are provably older than those records.
The people of the world in those ancient times did not think the world was a pizza on the back of a big turtle, they were perfectly aware it is a globe and of its position in the solar system and they dynamics of it's relation with the other "heavenly" bodies.
Man in his current physical state of being has had the same brain structure and reasoning pattern for over 200 000 years by the latest level of our knowledge. Do you seriously think that they were all running around with an IQ at the level of a moron no there will have been some pretty smart cookies around who would have worked things out. We know that civilization tends to grow around coastal regions We are becoming more aware that over the last 12 - 15K years we have lost a coastline equal to China in size due to global events. We know that sea levels rose over 400 feet in a geologically minute time period of a couple of centuries around 12k years ago for definite fact, they are just arguing over the cause. That surely must have have a major devastating impact on our ability to pass on our sum total of human ken to the next generations and sunk proof of our passing below a level we could easily reach until today.
Nothing to do with aliens or crop circles or any other such bovine poo. Just the acknowledgement that our predeccessors were probably a hell of a lot smarter than we in our arrogance give them credit for.
I am totally agnostic with regard to whether there are human or non human beings that reside on some other ball of dirt whizzing about the multiverse and if they have been here or not. I see no definitive proof either way, so I do not know.
Having had a total obsession about the Sumerians (since I played the "Royal game of Ur" and Indianna Jones as a child), Akkadians and the growth of civilizations in the fertile crescent to the point that my entire secondary school subject choices were focused on being able to get to UofC and their archeology program (I just missed out on a scholarship) and unfortunately my parents could not afford to pay, so I ended up taking the shilling instead. I also had a childhood in which biblical history was rammed into my head. This only increased my desire to learn about the ancient world. I soon managed to divest myself of the superstitions but never the interest in the cradle of civilization or ti's developement.
There are a growing number of respected and acknowledged experts in various fields of academic study who are not interested in little green men at all but are postulating that in certain areas previous societies had a level of knowledge about Astronomy and Mathematics at least on a par ours as of the 1800s. Maths doesn't lie and when you look at the numbers surrounding many of the ancient worlds relics they show an amazing level of sophistication in those areas.
It is unfortunate that so many people do not believe that we human beings are capable of such thinking so long ago. More and more evidence is being found and explained from further in our past thatn ever before thanks to technology and our own growing knowledge, that shows the possibility that our ancestors weren't the troglodites they are portrayed to be. Known recorded history is only 6k to 8k years old and yet we have physical evidence of astronomically based super structures all around the world that are provably older than those records.
The people of the world in those ancient times did not think the world was a pizza on the back of a big turtle, they were perfectly aware it is a globe and of its position in the solar system and they dynamics of it's relation with the other "heavenly" bodies.
Man in his current physical state of being has had the same brain structure and reasoning pattern for over 200 000 years by the latest level of our knowledge. Do you seriously think that they were all running around with an IQ at the level of a moron no there will have been some pretty smart cookies around who would have worked things out. We know that civilization tends to grow around coastal regions We are becoming more aware that over the last 12 - 15K years we have lost a coastline equal to China in size due to global events. We know that sea levels rose over 400 feet in a geologically minute time period of a couple of centuries around 12k years ago for definite fact, they are just arguing over the cause. That surely must have have a major devastating impact on our ability to pass on our sum total of human ken to the next generations and sunk proof of our passing below a level we could easily reach until today.
Nothing to do with aliens or crop circles or any other such bovine poo. Just the acknowledgement that our predeccessors were probably a hell of a lot smarter than we in our arrogance give them credit for.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
I seem to remember someone in more recent history getting himself in the doggie doodah for suggestion the earth orbited the sun.
