Why are Irish people so resistant to the metric system?

Lauder

knird evol wrote: »

You want a ten base system for everything. Everything neat and tidy and wrapped up in a nice neat little bundle.
Next you'll want to divide a day into ten 'time units'.
A 'metric week' will have ten days. Eight for work.

This is how the Nazis started...

Next they'll wan't us all using the same currency........

Iwannahurl

Yes, the Nazis used metric so metric is bad.

All the same, is it time for Metric Time?

Angron

I'm not resistant to metric, I only really use it for height cause it's what I've always done really. I use kms and kgs and whatnot more often though.

knird evol

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Yes, the Nazis used metric so metric is bad.

All the same, is it time for Metric Time?

Don't worry Iwannahurl when you get beyond ten years old your brain will develop to a point where you can understand why there isn't standarsisation of measurements, specifications and processes throughout human society. You can get a job with ISO.

Someday we can all live in interoperability, compatibility heaven.

Iwannahurl

Lauder wrote: »

The obvious answer to the OP's question is that people can visualise and understand Imperial better and quicker than metric.

I would almost always use imperial for normal day to day measurements (food, height, liquids, housing (per sq.ft) etc.. but when I want something done accurately or with a computer I'll use metric.

I was far too young to have learnt imperial in school and only learnt it by using it, and still I find it far easier than metric.

We use imperial because its easier, and is something we feel comfortable with!

Easier?

Let's test that theory.

Please respond with the answers you find quickest and easiest to calculate.

~~~~~~~~~

You need 100 sq ft of carpet. The one you like at the carpet shop costs €19.50 per sq yd. How much do you pay?

You need 10 sq m of carpet. The one you like at the carpet shop costs €19.50 per sq m. How much do you pay?

~~~~~~~~~

Which is the larger quantity: 2 quarts, 5 pints or 36 fl oz?

Which is the larger quantity: 200ml, 1.5l or 75cl?

~~~~~~~~~

How many pounds are there in 200 ounces?

How many kilograms are there in 2375 grammes?

~~~~~~~~~

Which drill bit is the larger: the 13/64, the 1/4 or the 5/32?

Which drill bit is the larger: the 5mm, the 6mm or the 3.5mm?

Iwannahurl

knird evol wrote: »

Don't worry Iwannahurl when you get beyond ten years old your brain will develop to a point where you can understand why there isn't standarsisation of measurements, specifications and processes throughout human society. You can get a job with ISO.

Someday we can all live in interoperability, compatibility heaven.

Er, there is actually. May I introduce you to the Metric System and SI Units...

liah

I use both. Part of my very early education was in the States where I was taught Imperial, and the rest in Canada where I learned Metric.

Basically, how I use it depends entirely on the point I need to get across. I think there is a time and a place for both: Imperial illustrates an idea, whereas metric illustrates the technicality.

If you want to give a general idea, you say mile, yard (though I still say metre for some reason), pound, pint, inch. If you want to be specific about the measurement, it's much better to use metric. But metric is in no way conducive to colloquial conversation, and I see no reason why people can't be well versed in both; from reading this thread most people can switch between the two anyway.

knird evol

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Er, there is actually. May I introduce you to the Metric System and SI Units...

Er, No there isn't.

Metric isn't universally used. Not standardised.
The whole point of your thread ?!

Try and keep up.....

Iwannahurl

Metric Math Mistake Muffed Mars Meteorology Mission


http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/toles-orbiter.gif

Iwannahurl

knird evol wrote: »

Er, No there isn't.

Metric isn't universally used. Not standardised.
The whole point of your thread ?!

Try and keep up.....

The metric system is officially in use everywhere except Liberia, Burma and the USA.

And Boards apparently. :rolleyes:

SI Units are standardised and international. That's why the system is called the International System of Units.




PS: Is it pure coincidence that your username is an anagram of Rod. Kelvin?

knird evol

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The metric system is officially in use everywhere except Liberia, Burma and the USA.

And Boards apparently. :rolleyes:

SI Units are standardised and international. That's why the system is called the International System of Units.

Ya see here is where we are getting to the heart of your whole confusion. 'Officially'. Your very open to suggestion. Someone tells you this is the 'OFFICIAL' way of doing things and you are confused why people do anything else.

There isn't one imperial system. It is many different systems of measurement that people have used for hundreds of years and continue to use. And will use after you are dead.

People who can think for themselves, unlike you. If someone says measure distance in kilometers and they are happy to measure distance in miles then they will continue to do so.

There are many advantages and disadvantages to standardisation. Should we all use the same railway gauge across nations. There are many interoperability benefits from doing so. There also great costs. Should we all use one system of measuring distance. Is it practicable for individuals or business to change systems they have used over long periods of time. If so which one?? Which one is 'OFFICIAL'. Some people have attempted to legislate others towards using one system. This hasn't been successful and neither has it necessarily been right. Learn to think for yourself.

Iwannahurl

knird evol wrote: »

Ya see here is where we are getting to the heart of your whole confusion. 'Officially'. Your very open to suggestion. Someone tells you this is the 'OFFICIAL' way of doing things and you are confused why people do anything else.

There isn't one imperial system. It is many different systems of measurement that people have used for hundreds of years and continue to use. And will use after you are dead.

People who can think for themselves, unlike you. If someone says measure distance in kilometers and they are happy to measure distance in miles then they will continue to do so.

There are many advantages and disadvantages to standardisation. Should we all use the same railway gauge across nations. There are many interoperability benefits from doing so. There also great costs. Should we all use one system of measuring distance. Is it practicable for individuals or business to change systems they have used over long periods of time. If so which one?? Which one is 'OFFICIAL'. Some people have attempted to legislate others towards using one system. This hasn't been successful and neither has it necessarily been right. Learn to think for yourself.

I do, and I think in metric.

Only in Ireland do I find such Luddite stubbornness. Even the UK has moved on more than we have, though it's been a while since I lived in that country so I wouldn't swear on it.

Using metric units officially and imperial units colloquially is not a sign of independence or clarity of thought. Quite the opposite.





PS: Oh now I geddit: Love Drink. Backward.

knird evol

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I do, and I think in metric.

Only in Ireland do I find such Luddite stubbornness. Even the UK has moved on more than we have, though it's been a while since I lived in that country so I wouldn't swear on it.

Using metric units officially and imperial units colloquially is not a sign of independence or clarity of thought. Quite the opposite.

You only think it's stubborn because you believe in an 'official' system. One system everyone must use. Who has the God given right to decree this?

Ask yourself first, why must everyone use the same system. Two, if they should then who gets to dictate what that system is. The French? ISO?
The current sitting Parliament in any given country ?

If Irish people want to use miles and someone else wants them to use kilometers, you are saying Irish people are stubborn and Luddites. But maybe the others are - including yourself.

gbee

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Easier? Let's test that theory. How many kilograms are there in 2375 grammes?
~~~~~~~~~

Which drill bit is the larger: the 13/64, the 1/4 or the 5/32?

Which drill bit is the larger: the 5mm, the 6mm or the 3.5mm?

How can you have that many grammes?

Now, personally, I'll give you the drill bits in metric and spanners too ~ those fraction sizes were and are still like giving my brain electric shocks and short circuits.

But I think the metric system is just too big in many cases, your two thousand grammes as you've used as an example I think is a perfect example of where metric breaks down, selling thing by the 100gm when I can't but a gramme and so on.

Metric has no gallon and it should have some equivalent marker, the pints is nice too, either the milkman or the barman gives them to one ...

Hotblack Desiato

It's maddening dealing with the building trade here. I measured up our kitchen floor precisely in square metres, the tiler converted that (using his calculator :rolleyes: ) to square yards - he charged for his work by the square yard - then I had to go to the tile shop to buy the tiles, where the tiles were priced in square yards but when you come to buy them - yep you guessed it - they convert it back into square metres so they can figure out how many boxes of Spanish tiles you need - it's nuts.

Why is it still legal (or still tolerated) to sell tiles or carpet in square yards, there seems to be some sort of scam going on where they quote a price "€9.99 per sq. yd." and then convert that to square metres on the actual invoice to get around the law. If the metric unit was smaller, you could bet your ass they'd be quoting their prices in the "cheaper" unit.

I also had to go mail-order to the UK (Axminster) to get metric measuring tapes. Why buy a tape with one half which is useless? :mad:

dougal-maguire

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Easier?

Let's test that theory.

Please respond with the answers you find quickest and easiest to calculate.

~~~~~~~~~

You need 100 sq ft of carpet. The one you like at the carpet shop costs €19.50 per sq yd. How much do you pay? 650

You need 10 sq m of carpet. The one you like at the carpet shop costs €19.50 per sq m. How much do you pay? 195

~~~~~~~~~

Which is the larger quantity: 2 quarts, 5 pints or 36 fl oz? i only use pints,and 5 pints is 2840ml

Which is the larger quantity: 200ml, 1.5l or 75cl? 1.5l

~~~~~~~~~

How many pounds are there in 200 ounces? 1.25 but i dont use that much either

How many kilograms are there in 2375 grammes? 2.375

~~~~~~~~~

Which drill bit is the larger: the 13/64, the 1/4 or the 5/32? 1/4

Which drill bit is the larger: the 5mm, the 6mm or the 3.5mm?

6mm


most people can work between both measurements,i dont see what the problem is if people can work between both.

we were selling a product for around two euro a foot and i had to work out the exact price per foot,i told the boss i wouldnt do it anymore,why not just use metres.he said it looks cheaper when the price is in feet.i agree with him,2 euro a foot looks cheaper than 6.56 a metre.

i think most people can visualise imperial better,i dont know why but im the same.ask me what 7ft is in mm its 2132,whats 2250 in ft,around 7'5" after quite a bit of thinking.

davetherave

I propose we start using a new system where everyday items and occurrences are use to measure values.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/converting_to_metric.png

Hotblack Desiato

dougal-maguire wrote: »

we were selling a product for around two euro a foot and i had to work out the exact price per foot,i told the boss i wouldnt do it anymore,why not just use metres.he said it looks cheaper when the price is in feet.i agree with him,2 euro a foot looks cheaper than 6.56 a metre.

and that sort of crapola is exactly why the EU introduced mandatory pricing in metric.

All meats in my local butcher are priced per kilo so you know where you stand - although if you ask for a 'pound' they'll try and flog you 550-600g - but because a pound is smaller than a kilo, if you left it up to the trade they'd all still be quoting prices per pound.

Iwannahurl

gbee wrote: »

How can you have that many grammes?

Now, personally, I'll give you the drill bits in metric and spanners too ~ those fraction sizes were and are still like giving my brain electric shocks and short circuits.

But I think the metric system is just too big in many cases, your two thousand grammes as you've used as an example I think is a perfect example of where metric breaks down, selling thing by the 100gm when I can't but a gramme and so on.

Metric has no gallon and it should have some equivalent marker, the pints is nice too, either the milkman or the barman gives them to one ...

All of the above is a joke, right?

Please tell me you're joking.

Iwannahurl

dougal-maguire wrote: »

6mm


most people can work between both measurements,i dont see what the problem is if people can work between both.

we were selling a product for around two euro a foot and i had to work out the exact price per foot,i told the boss i wouldnt do it anymore,why not just use metres.he said it looks cheaper when the price is in feet.i agree with him,2 euro a foot looks cheaper than 6.56 a metre.

i think most people can visualise imperial better,i dont know why but im the same.ask me what 7ft is in mm its 2132,whats 2250 in ft,around 7'5" after quite a bit of thinking.

That 'test' would have worked a little better if the poster it was addressed to had been online at the time!

Still, I think it makes the point clearly that comparing one metric size with another is far easier.

I simply cannot comprehend how anyone can claim that Imperial is easier to "visualise" in most cases.

Take the drill bit example I mentioned. Even a non-technical person or a child of reasonable age would be able to quickly list those drill bits in order of size. Highly unlikely that they would be able to do the same with the Imperial sizes.

Iwannahurl

ninja900 wrote: »

It's maddening dealing with the building trade here. I measured up our kitchen floor precisely in square metres, the tiler converted that (using his calculator :rolleyes: ) to square yards - he charged for his work by the square yard - then I had to go to the tile shop to buy the tiles, where the tiles were priced in square yards but when you come to buy them - yep you guessed it - they convert it back into square metres so they can figure out how many boxes of Spanish tiles you need - it's nuts.

Why is it still legal (or still tolerated) to sell tiles or carpet in square yards, there seems to be some sort of scam going on where they quote a price "€9.99 per sq. yd." and then convert that to square metres on the actual invoice to get around the law. If the metric unit was smaller, you could bet your ass they'd be quoting their prices in the "cheaper" unit.

I also had to go mail-order to the UK (Axminster) to get metric measuring tapes. Why buy a tape with one half which is useless? :mad:

Nuts it is. Though for some people in this thread being so nutty is actually "thinking for yourself".

I know of a farmers market where some time ago officials with a Weights & Measures remit (or another regulatory role of some sort) made the traders display their prices. In Euro per pound!

Chastened French, Germans and Dutch dutifully scribbling "€/lb" up on a board. Only in Ireland...

Blisterman

One thing I like about the imperial measurement, is that it's actually based on practical things. A foot is essentially the length of an average person's foot. An acre is the amount of land an ox could plough in a day.

The metre was originally defined as one 10,000,000th the distance between the equator and the north pole. Which really isn't very useful in any day to day use.

TheReverend

Blisterman wrote: »

One thing I like about the imperial measurement, is that it's actually based on practical things. A foot is essentially the length of an average person's foot. An acre is the amount of land an ox could plough in a day.

Yeah because I always wonder just how much land my ox could plough

JuliusCaesar

Since the American chains came in, coffee started to be sold in fluid ounces. Come on! we can all visualise pints, and litres, but fluid ounces?????

Wibbs

Having grown up with both being of that age I use both. I can see some small advantages in each. 12/16ths of an inch etc is a lot of bollocks. mm is so much neater.

That said metric is in dire need of a unit of measurement that approximates a foot. Theres way too big a gap from a centimetre to a metre. A 3rd of a metre doesnt really cut it. It's a particular size/unit of measurement that has a long history all the way back to the cubit.

gbee

ninja900 wrote: »

All meats in my local butcher are priced per kilo so you know where you stand - .

Oh no they are not!

Now, I did think this myself and my eyesight is not the best without the proper glasses. But anyhow I believed exactly what you just said, remember this as it's important.

I decided to treat myself to a few slices of exotic ham, it was €1,70 of thereabouts, "I'll have a Kilo of that I says!"

That'll be €16+ please. "For what?" "I don't want the whole pig, just a few slices"

It's priced per 100g. Now IMHO, this has to be illegal, so someone might put me right on this before I make a bigger fuss and bigger fool of myself already.

Epilogue: the manager gave me a few few slices to meet my budget after the assistant said she had cut a Kilo and ...... you all know the rest I'm sure.

ZRelation

Having grown up with just the metric system (and then having to get used to the imperial for work) I really don't get this 'easier to visualise' thing. Is it so hard to remember that 30 cm is roughly the size of ye old foot?!

Blisterman

One thing that I don't get is the fact that rulers are nearly always marked in centimetres.

I might be wrong, but I'm not aware of any profession which uses centimetres.

It's always either millimetres, metres or kilometres.

Johro

dougal-maguire wrote: »

i think most people can visualise imperial better,i dont know why but im the same.ask me what 7ft is in mm its 2132,whats 2250 in ft,around 7'5" after quite a bit of thinking.

Around? That's the problem with Imperial.
And 2250 mm to me would be 2m. 25cm.

Johro

Blisterman wrote: »

One thing that I don't get is the fact that rulers are nearly always marked in centimetres.

I might be wrong, but I'm not aware of any profession which uses centimetres.

It's always either millimetres, metres or kilometres.

Everywhere uses centimetres, except Ireland it seems. Jeez I just wrote a long post about it. The way trade people use millimetres here all the time is plain f#ckin annoying and not how metric is used on the continent.
It's not 5687mm, it's 5m. 68cm 7mm.
If you got an Argos catalogue check the furniture section, widths, heights, depths and lengths are in centimetres.

mikemac

I can understand a lot of imperial but fluid ounces is something I just cannot get my head around.

Litres or ml are far easier

And yes, I'm that person in the butchers who asks for 200 grammes of mince and get a reply "half a pound so?"

Johro

gbee wrote: »

How can you have that many grammes?

But I think the metric system is just too big in many cases, your two thousand grammes as you've used as an example I think is a perfect example of where metric breaks down, selling thing by the 100gm when I can't but a gramme and so on.

Nobody says: 'I'll have two thousand grams of sugar'. They'll say: I'll have two kilo's'.
If ya have a number like 2756g it's just 2 kilo's, 7 ounces and 56g. Or 2 and three quarter kilo's and 6 grams, whichever ya like:rolleyes:

Who says 'this table is 832 sixteenth's long'?

TeddyTedson

Royale with cheese

Iwannahurl

Blisterman wrote: »

One thing I like about the imperial measurement, is that it's actually based on practical things. A foot is essentially the length of an average person's foot. An acre is the amount of land an ox could plough in a day.

The metre was originally defined as one 10,000,000th the distance between the equator and the north pole. Which really isn't very useful in any day to day use.

Quaint, but vague. And completely impractical for any application requiring precision, reliability and reproducibility.

The definition of a metre is now "the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second."

It was not always thus, as the BIPM itself acknowledges. The point is that it is internationally agreed and internationally used, as well as being rational and simple to utilise.

Iwannahurl

Wibbs wrote: »

Having grown up with both being of that age I use both. I can see some small advantages in each. 12/16ths of an inch etc is a lot of bollocks. mm is so much neater.

That said metric is in dire need of a unit of measurement that approximates a foot. Theres way too big a gap from a centimetre to a metre. A 3rd of a metre doesnt really cut it. It's a particular size/unit of measurement that has a long history all the way back to the cubit.

Which went out, having come in, with the Ark?

Iwannahurl

gbee wrote: »

Oh no they are not!

Now, I did think this myself and my eyesight is not the best without the proper glasses. But anyhow I believed exactly what you just said, remember this as it's important.

I decided to treat myself to a few slices of exotic ham, it was €1,70 of thereabouts, "I'll have a Kilo of that I says!"

That'll be €16+ please. "For what?" "I don't want the whole pig, just a few slices"

It's priced per 100g. Now IMHO, this has to be illegal, so someone might put me right on this before I make a bigger fuss and bigger fool of myself already.

Epilogue: the manager gave me a few few slices to meet my budget after the assistant said she had cut a Kilo and ...... you all know the rest I'm sure.

Hamateur!

That reminds me of the guy I heard about who whisked his pregnant wife, who had started labour at home, into the maternity unit.

He told the staff in the labour ward that she was "four metres dilated".

Iwannahurl

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Royale with cheese

That's an interesting point. Come on, let's get into character.

Johro

Wibbs wrote: »

Having grown up with both being of that age I use both. I can see some small advantages in each. 12/16ths of an inch etc is a lot of bollocks. mm is so much neater.

That said metric is in dire need of a unit of measurement that approximates a foot. Theres way too big a gap from a centimetre to a metre. A 3rd of a metre doesnt really cut it.

There's the decimetre, which is ten centimetres. Another one that nobody seems to use here but is widely used on the continent. Metric's easy if ya use it right, not just jump from mills to metres like they do here.

ZRelation

Johro wrote: »

It's not 5687mm, it's 5m. 68cm 7mm.

I've never seen it written like that before. Usually 5.687m or 568.7 cm no?
Yeah cm and dm are used more widely outside Ireland.

TeddyTedson

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That's an interesting point. Come on, let's get into character.

lol, I didn't read all 13 pages but i bet someone already said this before me

Johro

gbee wrote: »

I decided to treat myself to a few slices of exotic ham, it was €1,70 of thereabouts, "I'll have a Kilo of that I says!"
That'll be €16+ please. "For what?" "I don't want the whole pig, just a few slices"

A freakin Kilo of ham? That's a lot more than a few slices gbee.
That just happened coz you're not used to the metric weight. Sure a kilo's roughly the same as two pound bags of sugar, or two jars of jam in weight. A few slices?

Johro

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Hamateur!

That reminds me of the guy I heard about who whisked his pregnant wife, who had started labour at home, into the maternity unit.

He told the staff in the labour ward that she was "four metres dilated".

That's a big babby.

Mike 1972

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Metric is EU bunk, .

Australia, Canada, Russia, Turkey, most of the rest of the world are in the EU

mikemac

The marts adapted to metric years ago.
Pence per pound is now euro per kg. And people say farmers are traditional

But still the butchers price per pound

peasant

Johro wrote: »

It's not 5687mm, it's 5m. 68cm 7mm.

Actually it depends who is talking to each other and the amount of necessary precision involved.

Two engineers talking about the length of a critical component will indeed say 5687 mm

Two carpenters talking about a beam will make it 568.7 cm

Two farmers (non Irish of course ) talking about a fence rail will make it 5.69 m

Me, talking about the length of my van will make it fivemeterseventy

That way, you've already got the tolerances covered as well without having to mention them ...0.5 mm; 0.5 cm; 1 cm; 5 cm plus/minus in the above scenarios

Johro

I guess what's confusing in the difference in weights is the difference in metric or imperial ounces and pounds, an imperial pound being 454g or 16 ounces (a 28g ounce) and a metric pound 500 g or 5 ounces. (a 100g ounce)
Which looks simpler?

Johro

peasant wrote: »

Actually it depends who is talking to each other and the amount of necessary precision involved.

Two engineers talking about the length of a critical component will indeed say 5687 mm

Two carpenters talking about a beam will make it 568.7 cm

Two farmers (non Irish of course ) talking about a fence rail will make it 5.69 m

Me, talking about the length of my van will make it fivemeterseventy

That way, you've already got the tolerances covered as well without having to mention them ...0.5 mm; 0.5 cm; 1 cm; 5 cm plus/minus in the above scenarios

True. Fair enough. I'd make it 5 meters 70 too. A builder friend of mine would call it 5700 mill though, and that confuses me. When the measurement is say, 5768mm and I, being from the continent, am used to centimetres.
But at a builders suppliers everything seems to be in mills, and why would you use the shortest metric measurement for the longest lengths of timber? i.e. 4960mm rather than 4.96 metres or 4m 96cm.
They don't do that everywhere, I agree, but that's my point.
And then ya get the length in metres and pricing per foot. I don't mind which way ya write it as long as it's made standard.
I would personally prefer measurements written as 4m 96cm 7mm, there's no room for mistakes that way and makes it easier for people to get used to centimetres and millimetres. I'm not even mentioning decimetres here;)
But yeah, if you're talking about a fence post measuring 1896mm, I'd call it one metre ninety.

peasant

Johro wrote: »

I guess what's confusing in the difference in weights is the difference in metric or imperial ounces and pounds, an imperial pound being 454g or 16 ounces (a 28g ounce) and a metric pound 500 g or 5 ounces. (a 100g ounce)
Which looks simpler?

No such thing as a metric ounce or metric pound for that matter

The old pound just got to mean 500g in everyday use...but pound is not an official unit of measure. Ounce isn't used at all in non-English speaking countries

In Austria, they have Dekagrams or deka for short = 10g

peasant

Johro wrote: »

And then ya get the length in metres and pricing per foot.

Or you go to buy a "twobyfour", get sold a "twobyfour" and at home you find it's 5 x 10 cm and doesn't bloody well fit

Piece of advice ...when going to the builders yard, bring a tape measure and always check

Johro

peasant wrote: »

Two carpenters talking about a beam will make it 568.7 cm

No no no.... That would be 5.69metres. Minus a skillsaw blade width inside the 5.69m mark if ya had to cut it to that size.