BS: Illogicalities

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: GUEST,Grishka
Date: 20 Nov 10 - 10:45 AM

leenia: scientists and accountants have computers which basically use the binary system, i.e. units of 2, 4, 8, 16 etc. Sometimes rounding is necessary, whichever subdivision is chosen.

It is generally advantageous to have subdivisions matching the number system used. All human beings, as opposed to computers, are now using a decimal system (arguably not the best possible choice). Therefore, whenever worldwide standardization is required, decimal subdivision has a head start.

Pocket calculators can easily convert between any existing unit systems. So it should not be difficult to answer questions like "which is more?" even if, say, one car manufacturer says miles per gallon and the other says litre per 1000 km. Laws can try to facilitate the calculations, but they cannot spare you thinking. Clever manufacturers or dealers have more advanced tricks to make their products look better than they are. -

"Illogicalities": salary paid per month rather than per working day.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Nov 10 - 10:13 AM

",,, what sort of measurement 10 is more convenient or 'useful' than 12..."

centimeters, kilometers, money...etc.

Since *I* am no mathematician either, I can't wrap my head around "base 12 from the beginning". ☺
I do know that as a woodworker, I would far rather use decimals for computing board layouts and buying lumber. (yes, I have tape measures with both systems, but all the products I have to match are already in inches & feet.)

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 20 Nov 10 - 09:38 AM

The old, or English system (gallons, pints, feet, inches, yards) is that it was intended by use for ordinary working people who buy big things and divide them. A yard, with its 36 inches, can easily be divided into 2,3,4,6,9,12,or 18 parts.

You can't do that with 100.

Same applies to 640 acres (one square mile).

However, if you are a scientist or accountant, and you want to do sophosticated calculations, then the metric system works better.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: C-flat
Date: 20 Nov 10 - 08:42 AM

Interesting history here

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 04:19 PM

Bill ~ I am no mathematician; but I fail to see for what sort of measurement 10 is more convenient or 'useful' than 12 would be if it had been conventionally adopted as the base from the beginning.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 03:20 PM

Just try packing 10 items in a square package...

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Will Fly
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 02:16 PM

France - the flagship country of the metric system - and its restaurants invariably sell oysters in plates of 6 or plates of 12! Vive la France!

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 01:41 PM

I'm sure it is 12 simply because multiples and fractions of 12 are easily 'shaped' for things like packing.
10s are useful in entirely different ways, as in certain measurements.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 01:17 PM

I wonder where the "dozen" measurment originates?
So much of our produce is packed that way. Multiples of 10 is logical enough, it's how we count things, but 12? Why not 14 or 17 or any other number? >>> C♭
===
It wasn't God of a law·of·Nature who said we have to count things that way, you know C.

In fact maths on a base/12 would make much more sense than our conventional metric/decimal system, surely ~ so many more factors? Didn't Nikolai Ivanovitch Lobachevsky [he of Tom Lehrer's great song] propose and formulate a mathematic based on 12? Or was that someone else? Anyhow...

It's just that we happen to have 10 fingers/thumbs to count on that presumably accounts for the daft system that has evolved. Another bit of evidence that those who urge "Intelligent Design" should just take a hard look around.

♥♫❤Michael❤♫♥

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 12:26 PM

Recently I believe the daft lot at Brussels thought we should be buying eggs in TENS! So, where you used to buy 'half a dozen eggs' you'd be getting FIVE in a box. How on earth would they pack that? 2x2 and one on the top??

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 10:45 AM

Shoutldn't that be Ffonetic?

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: andrew e
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 07:08 AM

Car brake and accelerator both the right foot. If the left foot was always over the brake, how many accidents could be avoided?

Phonetic should be spelt Fonetic.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 05:53 AM

Don't forget the good ol' 2X4 which measures 1 1/2X3 1/2???

In olden times (pre 1900?) lots of lumber suppliers provided 2 x 4s that were 1 3/4 x 3 3/4. The 2 x 4s then usually were a "rough cut" and generally weren't particularly smoothly finished.

In the US, into the early '50s, a 2 x 4 was often 1 5/8 x 3 5/8. The finish then was about the same as for later ones, but more consistent "thicknesses" were made necessary as plaster board replaced "lath & mud" plaster. The new smaller dimensions were pretty much what was left after the rough-sawn surface was cleaned up on the older ones.

The conversion to the current 1 1/2 x 3 1/2 was promoted as a "conservation effort" on the part of a bunch of "trade associations," but it took about a decade (or more) before all the lumber suppliers got rid of the older stock. The long transition period makes it something of a puzzle which size will be found in construction dating back before about 1955 or so. The old dimension 2-by studs were nearly always on 16 inch centers, but new ones came into fairly general use before local standards started permitting the currently common 24 inch center spacing (still allowed only in some codes), so the distance between studs may be 16" for either size 2-bys and is not a reliable indication of what size the studs are.

If you need to patch a wall in an old house, and mix in new spec studs where old ones were used, it was/is a certainty that when you nail up the plaster board somethin's gonna crack. Most remodeling carpenters "over 40" probably have learned the lesson, but the younger crowd still may be puzzled by why nothing fits when they start nailing things together, and it may take some "persuading" to get them to measure anything but the lengths they cut themselves before they concede that the 2-bys ain't all the same cross section.

Occasionally you can find "rough cut" 2 x 4s to the older "fat" dimensions. With better machines now, they can be sawed to the 1 3/4 x 3 3/4 dimensions with finish about as smooth as the usual "planed" grade. The larger rough dimensions are fairly common on "PT" (pressure treated for moisture/insect resistance for "exposed use") but this kind isn't suitable for "indoor" repairs. The "sawn dimension" ones would nearly always be "special order" for remodelling inside an old house, so the usual solution is that if you replace one stud you replace them all in that wall, or you "offset" the new stud to make one side of the wall flat, and use another stud offset the other way for the other side of the wall if you need it.

In other words, even the inconsistency isn't consistently inconsistent.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 04:40 AM

12 is a very convenient number as it packs 4*3. 14 was around in pounds to the stone. About the only multiple that wasn't in common use was 10. For computers multiples of 2 make a lot more sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: C-flat
Date: 19 Nov 10 - 02:45 AM

I wonder where the "dozen" measurment originates?
So much of our produce is packed that way. Multiples of 10 is logical enough, it's how we count things, but 12? Why not 14 or 17 or any other number?

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: MarkS
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 02:21 PM

"Don't forget the good ol' 2X4 which measures 1 1/2X3 1/2???"

Unless you want the exact dimension - in which case you order
5/4 or "five quarter" stock.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 01:54 PM

I think the idea is to encourage everyone to get fat so that the ones who are fat already don't feel they should try to lose weight, which might deter them from going to restaurants to pig-out so often.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: frogprince
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 01:24 PM

One of the local fast foods has a menu section from which you can choose 3 of the 5 items for a set amount. Ask for just two, and the price is at least half again as high.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 10:47 AM

I don't eat eggs. Years ago, I stopped to have breakfast in a small restaurant in a rural area. I asked for "Sausage, hash-browns and toast".....which was the same as the #4 breakfast, except that #4 came with 'one egg'. The price for #4 was about $2. The waitress said my order would cost $2.50, as it was ala carte
I asked, "You mean you are going to charge me 50¢ to not cook an egg?"
I was so nonplussed I didn't even think of just ordering #4 with a hard-fried egg, and leaving it on the plate.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 10:31 AM

I can't see how there is anything "illogical" in selling things in one-dozen lots, even when the items concerned happen to be metre rulers. After all, would anyone think it "illogical" to sell 12 9nch rulers in bundles of ten?

Having rulers that only show metric units (or non metric units for that matter) is of course illogical in a world where both sorts of measurements are still in common use.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 09:48 AM

Don't forget the good ol' 2X4 which measures 1 1/2X3 1/2???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 07:48 AM

I'm definitely sticking to pints!

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 07:48 AM

Man goes into butcher's shop.

"A pound of sausages, please."

"Sorry, sir, it's all kilos now, you know!"

"OK, I'll have a pound of kilos then!"

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: kendall
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 07:19 AM

The metric system makes more sense but I will never accept it.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:58 AM

Australia went metric in the 70's but we still get measurements for new babies in inches & pounds as well as centimetres & kilograms! I'm sure many new mothers don't understand these old measurements.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: GUEST,Dáithí
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:36 AM

..what about fuel and mileage in cars?

We buy our petrol in litres...but I don't know anybody who could tell you how many kilometres to the litre they get with their car. (Or even miles per litre, for that matter) - it's still miles per gallon - and does anybody under 40 really know what the hell a gallon is anyway?
D

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:26 AM

A paint roller refill costs about the same as the
roller and refill kit together.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: C-flat
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:20 AM

...or when I buy metric tape measures for the trade counter and they come in boxes of a dozen.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: C-flat
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:14 AM

I spend my working day supplying sheet materials such as plasterboard and plywood to building contractors and dry-liners and it still amuses me when they ask for
"two-four, by twelve, half inch boards"

Translate as: 2400mm long x 1200mm wide x "half inch" thick !

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:05 AM

When I was expecting my sons towards the end of the 70s the Ante Natal clinic at the hospital monitored my weight in metric weight. On this occasion I would have prefered illogical and to have had my weight recorded in stones and pounds rather than metric or even better both, all I wanted to know was whether I was putting on too much weight or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Illogicalities
From: Wolfhound person
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 06:03 AM

Building supplies such as 8' x 4' plasterboard sheets, now sold as 2.3m x whatever-it-is, but still the same size.
Same with wood lengths from DIY stores.

Paws

Subject: BS: Illogicalities
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Nov 10 - 05:45 AM

We went metric/decimal here in UK about the end of the 60s & beginning of 70s ~~ decimal currency replaced our old £sd in 1971. The Head of Maths in the school where I was teaching at that time accordingly put in an order for 100 metric rulers ~~ to receive a reply from the suppliers that they were available only in one-dozen lots.

Any other such illogicalities to report in your experience; especially, like this one, in the face of change or progress?

~Michael~