Imperial Measurements
Jan 9th 2013, 2:38 am
#31
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: CT
Posts: 33,654
Re: Imperial Measurements
I think it was 16 to the Penny, later reduced to 8, but they were larger.
Oh! and "MoJo's"
Last edited by Nutek; Jan 9th 2013 at 2:43 am. Reason: Who could forget MoJos?
Jan 9th 2013, 10:09 am
#32
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Aug 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,544
Re: Imperial Measurements
Oh groan, really? We don't need more inches and Fahrenheit.
Unless of course you think it makes sense to talk about freezing at 32f instead of at 0c and you'd rather not count in tens but twelves, fourteens and thirty sixes.
Unless of course you think it makes sense to talk about freezing at 32f instead of at 0c and you'd rather not count in tens but twelves, fourteens and thirty sixes.
Jan 9th 2013, 10:27 am
#35
The worse half of Weeze
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Back in TX
Posts: 3,231
Re: Imperial Measurements
Degrees Rankin is where it's at - at least that is absolute.
Jan 9th 2013, 12:19 pm
#37
I have a comma problem
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: Fox Lake, IL (from Carrickfergus NI)
Posts: 49,598
Jan 9th 2013, 1:00 pm
#38
The Unmod
Joined: Jul 2005
Location: Glen Mills, PA
Posts: 8,870
Re: Imperial Measurements
Metric is boring.
Modern motorways are built in curves rather than straight lines because drivers get bored and fall asleep on straight motorways; just as they get bored and slip decimals places in metric with no conversions to think about.
Modern motorways are built in curves rather than straight lines because drivers get bored and fall asleep on straight motorways; just as they get bored and slip decimals places in metric with no conversions to think about.
Jan 9th 2013, 1:06 pm
#39
Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Dixie, ex UK
Posts: 52,585
Re: Imperial Measurements
No, he means Rankine - proposed in 1859 by William Rankine, a Scotsman, but whereas each 1°K increment = 1°C, each 1°R increment = 1°F, making the Rankine an imperial temperature scale zeroed at absolute zero, but only of any use if you want to perform science and engineering calculations using lbs, ft, and gallons. 
Jan 9th 2013, 1:15 pm
#40
The worse half of Weeze
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Back in TX
Posts: 3,231
Re: Imperial Measurements
No, he means Rankine - proposed in 1859 by William Rankine, a Scotsman, but whereas each 1°K increment = 1°C, each 1°R increment = 1°F, making the Rankine an imperial temperature scale zeroed at absolute zero, but only of any use if you want to perform science and engineering calculations using lbs, ft, and gallons.
Jan 9th 2013, 1:32 pm
#41
I have a comma problem
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: Fox Lake, IL (from Carrickfergus NI)
Posts: 49,598
Re: Imperial Measurements
No, he means Rankine - proposed in 1859 by William Rankine, a Scotsman, but whereas each 1°K increment = 1°C, each 1°R increment = 1°F, making the Rankine an imperial temperature scale zeroed at absolute zero, but only of any use if you want to perform science and engineering calculations using lbs, ft, and gallons.
Kelvin is the one I tend towards, being the failed physicist that I am. I was born exactly 155 years after Baron Kelvin (un)interestingly enough. In the same city as well.
That's my WGAF moment of the day ...
Jan 9th 2013, 1:41 pm
#43
The worse half of Weeze
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Back in TX
Posts: 3,231
Re: Imperial Measurements
I work in psi/ft, lbs/gal, lbs/ft, 64ths of an inch, sacks (really - it's the measure for cement). Oh, and Fahrenheit.
Jan 9th 2013, 1:48 pm
#45
I have a comma problem
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: Fox Lake, IL (from Carrickfergus NI)
Posts: 49,598
Re: Imperial Measurements
I use feet, inches, miles and pounds for the day to day stuff, but always did calculations in metric. I don't think I'd have liked physics in imperial.
