SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the There's-nothing-hotter-than-ITS-90 dept.
At face value, measuring the temperature using Celsius instead of Fahrenheit seems to make sense. After all, the freezing point of water in Celsius is a perfect 0 degrees C — not that inexplicable 32 degrees, as in Fahrenheit. Also, the boiling point of water in Celsius is right at 100 degrees (Okay, 99.98, but what's a couple hundredths of a degree among friends?), instead of the awkward 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
But Fahrenheit may be the best way to measure temperature after all. Why? Because most of us only care about air temperature, not water temperature.
Celsius is great for measuring the temperature of water. However, we're human beings who live on dry ground. As a result, it's best to use a temperature gauge that's suited to the air, as opposed to one that's best used for water. This is one reason why Fahrenheit is superior.
Fahrenheit is also more precise. The ambient temperature on most of the inhabited world ranges from -20 degrees Fahrenheit to 110 degrees Fahrenheit — a 130-degree range. On the Celsius scale, that range is from -28.8 degrees to 43.3 degrees — a 72.1-degree range. This means that you can get a more exact measurement of the air temperature using Fahrenheit because it uses almost twice the scale.
A precise reading of temperature is important to us because just a little variation can result in a perceivable level of discomfort. Most of us are people who are easily affected even by even slight changes in the thermometer, and the Fahrenheit scale is more sensitive to those changes.
It seems the author is saying that nobody uses fractions of degrees in day-to-day life, so Fahrenheit is a better scale because it has smaller increments. I'm not sold on this, because you'll get the same temperature variation within a room whether you set your air-conditioning system to 21°C or 70°F, and people will complain that they prefer the room to be a bit warmer/cooler/whatever.
Does anyone here have another reason for advocating the continued use of the Fahrenheit scale ?
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday July 27 2017, @07:19PM (8 children)
He's arguing that one numbering system better reflects descriptions of comfort better than another numbering system? Why not Celsius for scientists, and a qualitative thermometer (e.g., cold, nippy, brisk, tepid, nice, warm, hot, sweltering) for people?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 27 2017, @07:59PM (2 children)
Well
no two people would have the same thermometer, so conversing about
temperature would be a pain - one person's "cold" might be another's
"nice"...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 28 2017, @06:22AM (1 child)
It's a pain right now! It's 30 degrees outside. Can you tell me, is it freezing cold or somewhat hot?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 28 2017, @10:17AM
That'd be pretty damn hot for me, not just somewhat.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday July 27 2017, @08:42PM (1 child)
Scientists do the Kelvin thing you insensitive clod! ;-)
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday July 27 2017, @09:45PM
Dammit, of course :-).
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Thursday July 27 2017, @11:46PM (2 children)
Guys, the answer here is obvious. Everyone should use Rankine for everything. No more problems.
;)
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Friday July 28 2017, @01:40AM (1 child)
This is supposed to be funny, telling me theres something I don't know about Rankine.
For example, what is it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 28 2017, @12:12PM
Celsius:Kelvin::Fahrenheit:Rankin