Jon Senior wondered (of not knowing how many pounds to a stone):
> Why? (Do you find it shocking, I appreciate why it's 14!) I've never
> really had cause to learn it (And every time I do, I promptly forget
> because I never use it). I understand kg. I have a feeling for kg. I
> have no concept of stone except with regard to human weight.
I find it shocking precisely *because* the stone is the unit most
commonly used in the UK for measuring human weight.
Over the past 7 or 8 years I've started meeting people (usually at least
10 years younger than me) who are completely unfamiliar with imperial
units other than the pint and the mile. It always takes me aback
somewhat. It seems strange that people are abandoning some really
useful units [1].
After posting yesterday I started thinking about why I like using
imperial measures, and I think I might know why.
People of my generation grew up with metric and imperial units. I can
use either, I'm quite happy converting between them because I've had to
do it all my life, but I have very definite preferences. For long
distances or approximate lengths, I prefer imperial. For precise
measurements over distances of a few yards or less, I'll use metric.
For weights I'll nearly always use imperial. For volumes I like pints
and gallons, but when I go under a pint I like ml. As far as use of
units goes, I don't believe I'm in any way atypical of people educated
in the UK during the 80's.
I think a large part of the reason for liking imperial units is that
people tend to be comfortable with small integers. That's why we have
units like the AU and the light year, as well.
If I give my height as 5'9" then I'm using two small integers, nice
comfortable fluffy numbers. If I'm 175cm then that's a big integer, it
just doesn't feel as comfortable somehow. If I'm 1.75m then my height
is no longer an integer, and suddenly it's a nasty spiky number.
If I give my weight as 10st 12lbs then again I'm dealing with two small
integers. 69kg is a much bigger number, so again it's not as friendly.
Note that this argument falls down when Merkins get involved. If I
was American I'd be 152lbs (or perhaps 300lbs), which is far too big a
number to bandy around comfortably.
I then continue using pounds for other weights because my own weight is
the weight that I am most familiar with, the one that has most meaning
for me, so I have much more of a feeling for the unit that I use for
measuring my own weight than for any other unit of weight.
And the reasons for liking metric measurements for some purposes are
accuracy and ease of calculation. A millimetre is a finer measure than
1/16" and it's much easier to perform calculations with metric units
than imperial. To my mind that's actually a good reason for continuing
to use imperial units some of the time, as well. It's good for
developing and maintaining mental arithmetic skills.
> In fact... why is it 14?
Erm, no idea. I'd be quite interested to know that as well. Similarly,
why are there 16oz to a lb, why 12" to a foot and why 1760 yards to a mile?
[1] The sooner the Fahrenheit scale is consigned to the dustbin of
history the better, though. I have no problems converting between F and
C, but I'd rather not have to.
--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
