you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 1 day ago (5 children)

What irony. In this case, literally no metric practitioners would use metric. They would use a mix of metric distance and imperial time which is just bizarre.

Feet per minute makes sense to most. Meters per hectosecond is inscrutible. I have yet to see a metric clock in my long life and I'm from a metric country.

Well, I'm going to call it a day, or to you metric fans, an 86.4 kiloseconds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    m/s is a perfectly reasonable unit for speed and easy to visualise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 20 hours ago (1 child)

    So you would prefer to visualize 0.025 m/s to 5 fpm?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago

    Yes. Or go with 25mm/s in that case, but because metric is trivial to move up/down to different sized units that is simple to do.

    Meanwhile in imperial, fuck knows. 12 inches to a foot, 3 feet to a yard and then some number over 1000 yards to a mile.

    Even worse with volume, which fucking gallon are you using? There are different ones! It might be (vaguely close to) 3.5L, or 4.5L! I think there might even be another one somewhere.

  • source
  • parent