Why is the metric system associated with the '70s?

Started by bandit957, February 20, 2021, 10:05:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

formulanone

#50
Quote from: SP Cook on February 23, 2021, 12:49:03 PM
I was caught up in the metric push of the 70s in school.  It failed, in no small part, because teachers did not understand what the goal was.  First, not really knowing the system, they thought that any prefix would work with any unit.  While this is technically true, real world usage has some units simply not in common use.

I remember having to learn prefixes like deci- and hecto- and then having a physics teacher in 11th grade who basically told us that most of the way the metric system was taught was more confusing than it needed to just be understood. Almost nobody was using those prefixes, except in very specialized contexts (decibels, for example). Just using the base units and usually 1/1000 of it and just grams/kilograms/liters, not centimeters, dekagrams, and hectoliters would have made it a lot simpler.

Temperature is another matter, but I think scaling it to the typical "feelings" associated with -20, -10, 0, 10, 20, 30, 40 might have made it easier to understand from a younger age (of course, there's always going to be That Guy Who Wears Shorts Outdoors When It's 5 Out There...).


GaryV

Centimeters is a useful in-between unit because a millimeter is too small for most uses.  "About 60 mm" - no, just say 6 cm.

I'm surprised dekagrams aren't used more for things up to a half kilogram.  A gram is so small, you usually have to have hundreds of them to have a decent pile of something.

bandit957

I didn't know customary measures were called that until 5th grade when my math book called it that. I was in 5th grade in 1983-84, and the math book had a bunch of pages on the metric system but just one tiny little page on customary measures, which appeared to be an afterthought.

My main memory of 5th grade math though was when a classmate lost his math book, but later he miraculously found it right at the same time mine disappeared. You should have seen the look on his face when the teacher later found my name inside the cover of the found book. You guessed it! This kid stole my book to replace the one he lost.
Might as well face it, pooing is cool

kphoger

Quote from: bandit957 on February 23, 2021, 04:36:58 PM
I didn't know customary measures were called that until 5th grade when my math book called it that. I was in 5th grade in 1983-84, and the math book had a bunch of pages on the metric system but just one tiny little page on customary measures, which appeared to be an afterthought.

I remember having a book that clearly stated the USA would have completely converted to metric by 1983.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

1995hoo

One logistical issue with conversion in the US would be the sheer number of road signs. Canada apparently changed every speed limit sign in the country over Labour Day weekend in 1977. I can't imagine it being possible to convert every speed limit sign in the USA that quickly.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

kphoger

Some (a lot of?) things would simply never change, for practical reasons.  I mean, farmers are still going to "plow the northwest forty", rather than "plow the northwest 16.1874 hectares", no matter what.  And, if they sell a portion of their land, it's still going to be "a quarter-section" rather than "0.647497 square kilometers".  Chicago's street grid will still be "eight blocks to a mile", no matter if highways signs have kilometers on them or not.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

hotdogPi

Quote from: GaryV on February 23, 2021, 04:27:53 PM
Centimeters is a useful in-between unit because a millimeter is too small for most uses.  "About 60 mm" - no, just say 6 cm.

I'm surprised dekagrams aren't used more for things up to a half kilogram.  A gram is so small, you usually have to have hundreds of them to have a decent pile of something.

Some things, mainly nutrition, are "per 100 grams"; they just don't call it a hectogram (dekagrams are 10 grams, not 100).

Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

kphoger

Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

kalvado

Quote from: kphoger on February 23, 2021, 05:07:35 PM
Some (a lot of?) things would simply never change, for practical reasons.  I mean, farmers are still going to "plow the northwest forty", rather than "plow the northwest 16.1874 hectares", no matter what.  And, if they sell a portion of their land, it's still going to be "a quarter-section" rather than "0.647497 square kilometers".  Chicago's street grid will still be "eight blocks to a mile", no matter if highways signs have kilometers on them or not.
"eight blocks to a mile" can easily become "five blocks to a km"...

formulanone


Brandon

Quote from: kalvado on February 23, 2021, 05:19:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on February 23, 2021, 05:07:35 PM
Some (a lot of?) things would simply never change, for practical reasons.  I mean, farmers are still going to "plow the northwest forty", rather than "plow the northwest 16.1874 hectares", no matter what.  And, if they sell a portion of their land, it's still going to be "a quarter-section" rather than "0.647497 square kilometers".  Chicago's street grid will still be "eight blocks to a mile", no matter if highways signs have kilometers on them or not.
"eight blocks to a mile" can easily become "five blocks to a km"...

However, that would not match up to where the major roads/streets are, which are on the section lines.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

bwana39

Back in the seventies, there was thought that the US, just like Canada, was on the brink of conversion to SI. But it never happened. I was taught SI (metric) measurements. It is really hard to learn metrics if you try to equate them to standard US measurements.  I prefer metric measurement for its neat ten based design. It is also consistent. A ML is always a ML. but a US fluid ounce could be several different similar but inexact measurements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_imperial_and_US_customary_measurement_systems
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

Scott5114

#62
We were taught metric in the late 90s/early 2000s, but rather than focusing on unit conversions it was the k-h-dk-u-d-c-m conversion chart. In contrast, I don't remember ever being taught anything about customary measurements; I guess they assumed you learned those from the ether or something.

So as a result, I still have problems with customary measurements and avoid them when at all possible. I have never managed to get a handle on how many quarts are in a pint or how many of those are in a gallon, or even which of them is bigger, because I never use those to measure anything. Gallons I know because milk comes in gallon jars. But nobody specifies smaller units of liquid smaller than a half gallon as, like, 0.4 of a gallon.

Inches are the worst unit of measure anyone ever came up with; there is nothing more frustrating than having to stare at the ruler trying to count off sixteenths of an inch if you don't measure things often enough to just be able to know from looking at the ruler. ("Okay, 1/16, 1/8, 3/16, uh... what's that next one, a fourth?") And why do some rulers have 1/16" marks only between the 0" and 1" mark? What if you need to measure something that's 4 7/16"? It's just a lot less hassle to flip the ruler around to the cm side. ("Okay, it's between the 7 and 8 cm marks, and it's past the long 5 mm mark, so that's 75, 76, 77, 78 mm. Or 7.8 cm.")

On the other hand, I have no use for Celsius. There's no real need to convert between units (we didn't make every seven °F equal a temperature ounce or something idiotic like that), and I don't intentionally cause water to freeze that often, so it's nice having the smaller and more precise degree units.

That being said, I never really have to worry about converting between one or the other except when I'm talking to someone in another country and they, say, describe their height in cm or something. I tend to measure things in metric and leave them in metric, unless I'm working on something like a building which has already been measured in a different unit of measure.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

bandit957

Another thing like this is the "new math." I remember seeing a math book around 1980 that made a big deal out of "sets."
Might as well face it, pooing is cool

hotdogPi

Quote from: bandit957 on February 23, 2021, 06:33:03 PM
Another thing like this is the "new math." I remember seeing a math book around 1980 that made a big deal out of "sets."

Sets are nowhere near new, but they're more of an advanced topic.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

davewiecking

Let's talk home building. 4x8 piece of plywood/drywall. Joists 16"  on center. 3/4"  pipe. 30"  wide stove. Doors 6'8"  tall. Would be annoying to change those to metric. No, I'm not going to get into why a 2 by 4 is really 1 1/2 x 3 1/2" , but a 2 by 8 is 7 1/4" . Except when you're working on an older house...

Scott5114

Quote from: davewiecking on February 23, 2021, 06:43:55 PM
Let's talk home building. 4x8 piece of plywood/drywall. Joists 16"  on center. 3/4"  pipe. 30"  wide stove. Doors 6'8"  tall. Would be annoying to change those to metric. No, I'm not going to get into why a 2 by 4 is really 1 1/2 x 3 1/2" , but a 2 by 8 is 7 1/4" . Except when you're working on an older house...

Those sound more annoying how they are now, to be honest.

A door is 6'8". How far would halfway up it be? Easy, 3'4". How about a quarter of the way up? Uuuuuh....
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

1995hoo

Quote from: bandit957 on February 23, 2021, 06:33:03 PM
Another thing like this is the "new math." I remember seeing a math book around 1980 that made a big deal out of "sets."

Apparently there is some other form of new math now. My brother-in-law and his wife were saying the way their kids are taught math is incomprehensible and makes it impossible for them to help their kids when they struggle with their homework–if the kids don't show their work using the technique the teachers are required to teach, then they're deemed to have gotten it wrong even if their ultimate answer is correct.

Apparently there is a lot of drawing circles and they don't learn to carry or borrow. Makes me wonder how they do long division.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

kkt

I'd rather the lumber did have metric measurements if they were true measurements and not code for a dimension minus the "carrying charges".

If you buy half a liter of soup, you get 500 ml, not 450 ml because some of it boiled off in the making.

Dirt Roads

Quote from: bandit957 on February 23, 2021, 06:33:03 PM
Another thing like this is the "new math." I remember seeing a math book around 1980 that made a big deal out of "sets."

Ah hah!  The answer to the OP's question is that the metric system was a key focus of "New Math" in the 1970s.  Of which I am a byproduct thereof.  Don't know if that's good or bad.

kalvado

Quote from: Brandon on February 23, 2021, 05:38:56 PM
Quote from: kalvado on February 23, 2021, 05:19:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on February 23, 2021, 05:07:35 PM
Some (a lot of?) things would simply never change, for practical reasons.  I mean, farmers are still going to "plow the northwest forty", rather than "plow the northwest 16.1874 hectares", no matter what.  And, if they sell a portion of their land, it's still going to be "a quarter-section" rather than "0.647497 square kilometers".  Chicago's street grid will still be "eight blocks to a mile", no matter if highways signs have kilometers on them or not.
"eight blocks to a mile" can easily become "five blocks to a km"...

However, that would not match up to where the major roads/streets are, which are on the section lines.
Does it match up with the dimensions as of today? I just went to Cook county's tax map and measured some distance in a well-defined grid area. Sure enough, it was 0.503 mile street center to street center - good enough for the estimate, but error is similar to rounding a mile to 1.6 km.
I really doubt you can do much better given the spherical shape of the planet and non-flat terrain.
Accuracy of odometer would be still limited by tire wear,  for tax purposes one needs to take street width into account...
So I doubt the change would be that problematic..

vdeane

I think metric vs. US customary is like learning a language.  If you're fluent in a language, you're not constantly translating between it and your native language - you're thinking in that language.  The same is true with metric.  Trying to teach people metric by having them convert between metric and US customary probably wasn't a good idea - it just creates more math problems and frustration.

The last time I was in Canada (2014), I actually developed a good sense of using metric for distances and speeds.  I wasn't saying "oh, that's 70 km, so it's 43 miles" - I was just thinking in km (even then, trying to translate km and miles wasn't great, though I'm better with kph and mph, and now I'm even worse due to lack of use).  It helps that my car has a digital speedometer and odometer, so I'm not reading the little numbers, I just push a button and everything switches.  It's worth noting, however, that the same did not happen for temperature (in my head or in the car - and the latter no doubt played a part in the former!).  The same is true with liters and gallons (and as such I have no clue how to compare gas prices between the US and Canada).  Sure, the car does switch miles per gallon to liters per 1000 km, but those aren't easy to compare directly since they're basically opposites, and I'd encounter nothing helping to convert (especially as the car was new at the time and I didn't have the same sense of how big the tank was that I do now (these days, I can predict how much gas I'll need within a gallon or two; back then, I couldn't); the fact that I only refueled in Canada once doesn't help).

Honestly, I wish the US had switched to metric, if only to eliminate the differences in units on each side of the border.  That said, the US and Canada are probably more similar to each other relative to the rest of the world than they appear at first glance.  Both countries halted conversion part way, but Canada got a few very high profile things done first (road signs, gas, weather reports, etc.) that the US hadn't.  And, as mentioned, the UK still uses miles (which is arguably even worse than the US, as both they and the EU use Vienna Convention signs, and there's no obvious difference to clue you in to the fact that speed limits use different units - you just have to know which country you're in and that the UK uses mph, even on the Ireland/Northern Ireland border).  Saying "the US is one of only a couple countries not using metric" vastly oversimplifies things.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

kkt

What does Canada still use Imperial or customary measures for?

Road Hog

Driving in Europe, it was easy to figure your ETA. Instead of figuring one minute per mile at 60 mph, you estimated one minute per 2 KM at 120 kph and just go from there.

120 to 130 kph was typical Autobahn speed at the time ... 130 kph = about 80 mph which was plenty fast. But if you didn't want to ride with the big dogs, you kept your ass in the right lane.

bandit957

I've barely been to Canada. but the last time I was there (many years ago), I kept calling kilometers "short miles." It was easier to say.
Might as well face it, pooing is cool



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.