"Hey. Come over and get some BBQ and food that doesn't look like sad beans. We can talk about how boring a soccer game is when one team leads and they just play keep away for 40 minutes. Man, this corn on the cob is so good. Sure glad my teeth are straight so I can eat it super easy. Anyone else enjoy having a complete global dominance on movies, tv, and pop culture? How about the internet?"
Americans always regurgite the "Fahrenheit is how people feel" nonsense, but it is just that: nonsense. Americans are familiar with fahrenheit so they think that it is more inituitive than other systems, but unsurprisingly people who are used to celsius have no problems using it to measure "how people feel" and will think it is a very inituitive system.
Can confirm. Moved from the US to Canada and maybe a year of using Celcius revealed to me just how fucking stupid and convoluted Fahrenheit is. My dad spent three weeks out here and started using Celcius on his phone. Now I only use Fahrenheit when dealing with fevers or temping cases of suspiciously overripe produce.
Fellow Americans. Celcius is superior and more intuitive for those who take a moment to adjust to it. It is okay to accept this as fact without developing an inferiority complex. USA not always #1. USA quite often not #1 and that is okay. It is okay for USA to not be #1 without developing an inferiority complex.
I mean, you're 100% wrong. Fahrenheit isn't "how people feel" arbitrarily, it's almost literally a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside. You need no prior knowledge to interpret a Fahrenheit measurement. Which really reflects poorly on everyone who says "Fahrenheit doesn't make any sense" because if they were capable of any thought at all they would figure it out in 2 seconds, like everyone else. I'm a lab rat that uses Celsius all day every day, I'm just not a pretentious stuck up tool about alternate measurements just because I refuse to understand them.
I like that Fahrenheit has a narrower range for degrees. 1C is 1.8 degrees F. So, F allows you to have more precision without the use of decimals. Like, 71F feels noticeably different to me than 64F, but that is only a 3.8 degree difference in C.
3 degrees celcius is easily noticeable too so that's a bit of a moot point. If anything, 1 degree celcius is much harder to discern and therefore having an even more granular scale is unnecessary.
It is really easy to map onto human feel though. 0-100 pretty accurately maps onto our minimum and maximum realistically survivable temps, long-term, and the middle temperatures of those are the most comfortable. It's far more round, when it comes to describing human preference and survivability, than Celsius is.
I bet a lot more people know what 0°C feels like than 0°F. One is freezing point, one is a completely arbitrary temperature which only gets called "the lowest you'll experience" as a post hoc rationalisation of Fahrenheit. Most people will never experience anything that cold, some people experience colder.
I even bet more people know what 100°C feels like than 100°F. One is accidentally getting scalded by boiling water, the other is a completely arbitrary temperature which is quite hot but not even the hottest you'll experience in America.
What makes 0F (-18C) special? How do you estimate survivability at such temperature? If I'd be out on the street naked, I would die there in a matter of minutes. At the same time, there is plenty of places where winter temperatures go -40F (-40C) and even below, yet people very much survive and live there.
Similar with 100F (38C). There are places with higher temps in the summer, up to 120F (49C) in some places, yet people survive. Still, if you're not equipped with anything, 100F (38C) will burn you alive.
All that not to mention that 50F (10C) is actually cold, not comfortable.
Fahrenheit is only intuitive and "feeling-descriptive" because you're used to it. From a person born in Celsius country, it's really not less intuitive.
I know I can be comfortable in my birthday suit at around 25C. Less than 20 is chilly, less than 10 - cold, less than 0 - freezing. More than 30 is hot, more than 40 is deadly.
"Fahrenheit is how people feel" only makes sense if said people have never used another scale. You know how 100F "feels" because that's what you use. If you used Celsius you'd know how that scale feels instead, and be used to using the more useful scale generally.
See also: people who think they don't have an accent.
It only works if you grew up in a country that uses Fahrenheit. I didn't, so to me Celsius is how I feel. I've no idea whether 20 f is jeans and a t-shirt weather, or if I should be getting my coat. 20 c however I know that as long as it's not windy I'll be good with jeans and a t-shirt, but that it's still a little too cool to get out my shorts.
If your version of "fun" is repeatedly showing everyone the stupid thing you posted last time you were stoned out of your mind and telling them it's a great mnemonic or mantra, then I'mma have to ask for us to not be friends.
Let me explain. Anything below 0F is really cold for a human, and anything above 100F is really hot. The Fahrenheit scale was built around human biology.
0C isn't even that cold, and 100C is literally instant death. Thus, Celsius is less applicable to the human experience and more applicable to the physical properties of water. The typical range of human scale temperatures is like -10 to 40 degrees on the Celsius scale? Makes no sense.
Kelvin is the most scientifically objective scale, but also the least intuitive for humans, because absolute zero is completely outside our frame of reference.
So it's easily demonstrable that Fahrenheit is how people feel, Celsius is how water feels, and Kelvin is how molecules feel.
Be forewarned that I am willing to die on this hill, and any challenges to my position will result in increasingly large walls of text until you have conceded the point 😤
main arguments from below
Celsius is adequate because it’s based on water, and all life on earth is also based on water, so it’s not totally out of our wheelhouse. But for humans specifically I think Fahrenheit is the clear answer.
One point that many may overlook is that most of us here are relatively smart and educated. There are a good number of people on this planet who just aren’t very good with numbers. Obviously a genius could easily adapt their mind to Kelvin or whatever.
You have to use negative numbers more frequently with Celsius > Celsius has a less intuitive frame of reference
Each Celsius degree is nearly two Fahrenheit degrees > Celsius is less granular
The reason I argue the more granular Fahrenheit is more intuitive is because a one degree change should intuitively be quite minor. But since you only have like 40 or 50 degrees to describe the entire gamut of human experiences with Celsius, it blends together a bit too much. I know that people will say to use decimals, but its the same flaw as negative numbers. It’s simply unintuitive and cumbersome.
B) 66F is room temperature. Halfway between freezing (32F) and 100F.
the intuition is learned and not natural.
All scales have to be learned, obviously. It’s far easier to create intuitive anchorpoints in a 0-100 system than a -18 to 38 system. Thus, Fahrenheit is more intuitive for the average person.
I should note that if you are a scientist, the argument completely changes. If you are doing experiments and making calcualtions across a much wider range of temperatures, Celsius and Kelvin are much more intuitive. But we are talking about the average human experience, and for that situation, I maintain Fahrenheit supremacy
Final edit:
Well, I got what I asked for. I think I ended up making some pretty irrefutable points with these two last ones though. Once again, math saves the day. If somebody wants to continue the discussion make another thread and tag me because this is a bit much for science memes.
further arguments
It’s not about the specific numbers, but the range that they cover. It’s about the relation of the scale to our lived experience. Hypothetically, if you wanted to design a temperature scale around our species, you would assign the range of 0-100 to the range that would be the most frequently utilized, because those are the shortest numbers. It’s not an absolute range, but the middle of a bell curve which covers 95% of practical scenarios that people encounter. It doesn’t make any sense to start that range at some arbitrary value like 1000 or -18.
When the temperature starts to go above the human body temperature, most humans cannot survive in those environments. Thus, they would have little reason to describe such a temperature. Celsius wastes many double digit numbers between 40-100 that are rarely used. Instead, it forces you to use more negative numbers.
This winter, many days were in the 10s and 20s where I live. Using Celsius would have been marginally more inconvenient in those scenarios, which happen every winter. This is yet another benefit of Fahrenheit, it has a set of base 10 divisions that can be easily communicated, allowing for a convenient level of uncertainty when describing a temperature.
the end is nigh
Generally -40 to 40 are the extremes of livable areas.
Sure, water is a really good system and it works well.
And for F that range is -40 to 104. See how you get 64 extra degrees of precision and nearly all of them are double digit numbers? No downside.
Furthermore F can use its base 10 system to describe useful ranges of temperature such as the 20s, 60s, etc. So you have 144 degrees instead of just 80, and you also have the option to utilize a more broad 16 degree scale that’s also built in.
You might say that Celsius technically also has an 8 degree scale(10s, 30s), but I would argue that the range of 10 degrees Celsius is too broad to be useful in the same way. In order to scale such that 0C is water freezing and 100C boiling, it was necessary for the units to become larger and thus the 10C shorthand is much less descriptive than the 10F shorthand, at least for most human purposes.
The Fahrenheit scale was built around human biology.
Nope, it was built around the highest and lowest extremes some dude could create in his room. Not based on human biology in the slightest. Don't repeat this false information.
0C isn’t even that cold, and 100C is literally instant death.
Yeah, but counter argument, who gives a shit?
The "meme" doesn't say anything remotely close to "from 0 to 100". I don't know why you are under the impression that these scales become inaccurate if you leave the 0-100 range.
I live in a region that frequents -40C to +40C over a year- that's centered on zero, so it's already better for "how humans feel" than being centered on 32 and pretending there is some cosmic/celestial/god ordained reason for it.
Kelvin is the most scientifically objective scale, but also the least intuitive for humans...
Still no one giving a shit- the "meme" doesn't remotely even suggest anything related to this.
Be forewarned that I am willing to die on this hill
I don't know why you sign this off with "I'm an obnoxious twat", but I'm perfectly happy with using the block function if the threat is real.
The typical range of human scale temperatures is like -10 to 40 degrees on the Celsius scale? Makes no sense.
But it makes so much sense though. Because it's anchored around the freezing and boiling points of water, which is a universal experience we can all relate to. 0°C outside? It's freezing.
Fahrenheit as "the human scale" is what makes no fucking sense. You end up with the same exact problem where your specific range of "human scale temperatures" does not line up with 0-100°F at all. But it's also not anchored to water's behavior. So it just ends up being arbitrary.
I grew up with celcius and to me it feels more applicable to the human experience. It literally only depends on which one you're more used to, idk why people feel the need to come up with these weird unnecessary "explanations".
Anything below 0F is really cold for a human, and anything above 100F is really hot.
Therefore the perfect temperature would be 50°F, which is 10°C, in my opinion a little too cold to be perfect, I'd prefer something in the 15-20°C range.
'murican being 'murican. That's why nobody likes you people.
Kelvin is the most scientifically objective scale, but also the least intuitive for humans, because absolute zero is completely outside our frame of reference.
I like watching people dying in this hill, more power to you. I don't necessarily agree, but telling people it's negative anything just to say it's pretty cold is indeed less intuitive to me (and kids don't even know negatives until a bit older).
Only thing is, 100 doesn't need to be anyone's scale, with C I think of it more like a scale from 10 to 40, especially since I live in California, and F is more a scale from 50 to 110. It'd probably help if F really was based on human temps, with 100 being the average temp whenever you measure, instead of 96 to 98.
(An aside, neither are ratio scales. 0 in both cases are arbitrary and a temp of 100 isn't twice as hot as 50. Only Kelvin is like that, which makes it my favorite even if it's never intuitive, haha)
That is a large amount of text to say "I am used to fahrenheit therefore it makes sense to me, and now I will proceed to claim it is the only system that shows how humans feel".
Fahrenheit is a translation layer between Celsius and Americans. All their weather stations have been Celsius for ages, it's a societal decision to use an arbitrary unit instead. The "69F censoring" which turned out to be a rounding artefact illustrated that nicely.
Their government could change that, power to them that they decide not to 🤷♂️
fahrenheit is literally defined by celsius at this point, afaik celsius is literally the official standard of the united states but everyone just.. keeps using fahrenheit anyways
There's also no such thing as an inch. It's defined by the meter, there isn't an official yardstick.
The only reason the UK, Canada and USA used the same inch is because they needed to interchange parts for weapons and machines during WW1. Despite all thinking they used the same measurement system the definition had drifted between them. Metric was defined by enlightenment people with better methods of reproducing the standard. So it was easier to adopt a inch definition based on 25.4mm.
The UK and US inch only match because of WW1. The imperial volumes are still different.
Reading these comments, my spiteful genie wish is to invent and proliferate a log base 10 scale, something like earthquake magnitudes or decibels. Y'all hate F or C? Welcome T, where 1 equals 1 Kelvin, 2 equals 10 Kelvin, 3 equals 100 Kelvin, 4 equals 1000 Kelvin, and so on.
It's easy! Humans live somewhere around 3, as does boiling and freezing, while the sun is between a 4 and a 5 at the surface and the core is closer to an 8.
If fahrenheit was how people felt, then room temperature would be 0 because that's the ideal temperature. Negative fahrenheit would be too cold, positive to warm.
I would like to use this system you propose. 0 is room temperature, plus/minus 100 is death by freezing or heatstroke... But we probably have to do some work to make units fit in a linear way. Are you filing the patent or am I?
I was in a sauna at +95 Celsius for several minutes the other day. And within the same week I felt -35 Celsius cold on my bare skin.
Both could kill me provided a bit more exposure, but they don't instantly. Meanwhile, +4 Celsius can also cause death by hypothermia pretty easily in the right circumstances.
So, while I like the idea, I think implementation will be hard as there is no clear death number on either end of the spectrum. Not to mention humidity, clothing, exertion, level of hydration, etc...
That isn't consistent with K and C though. -K doesn't exist. And water doesn't become more frozen at -C (well I guess it technically becomes different kinds of frozen).
Zero in that sense represents the absolute limit that one could exist in a particular state, which for F would be comfort? I guess the issue with humans is that 0 would be very subjective. But I think for almost all humans, the limit would be closer to 40F than 0F.
100 is hot out and 0 is cold. That's not crazy. 35 being hot out is pretty arbitrary for day to day use. But if your job is boiling water every day, it's probably not the best.
The freezing point of water seems a hell of a lot more relevant to what humans consider 'cold'...which is why it's the zero. The boiling point of water isn't the zero in Celsius after all.
Also 'cold' as a concept is often represented with symbols related to frozen water such as snow flakes and icicles.
With Celsius it's all nice and round numbers unlike the mess called fahrenheit:
0°C—black ice, snow, be careful on the road and you probably want to wear gloves and a hat
0...10°C—a bit chilly, but you can leave your hat home
10...20°C—pleasant, but not quite tee-and-shorts yet
20...30°C—nice summer weather
30...40°C—holy crap it's hot!
40...50°C—are you fucking kidding me?
50+°C—my proteins are starting to denature...
100°C—good sauna
110°C—finns think it's a good sauna
120+°C—finns think it's getting a bit too hot in the sauna. Italians tend to vaporize in sauna (speaking from experience)
...
0...-10°C—a pleasant winter weather
-10...-20°C—getting a bit frosty
-20...-30°C—finns think it's a pleasant winter weather
-40°C—vodka freezes. Russians and finns agree it's getting a bit frosty
-50°C—getting a little hard to start your Uazik in the morning in Siberia due to engine oil solidifying
-60°C—researchers in Antarctica all agree it's getting a bit frosty and someone should close the window
To be honest, a 10°C range is way too much variation for me to consider it as the same 'category' (at least in the 0°C ~ 40°C range). I say that as a Brazilian.
See that's my issue with degrees C. It's not as fine a measurement as degrees F. A difference of 5F is not terribly much, but it is noticeable. A difference of 5C is substantial (to me) and would make me very uncomfortable. So with F, I can know with more precision how uncomfortable I should expect to be :)
Yeah, like who needs to tell quickly whether road conditions will be icy? It's much more useful to know how much warmer it is than the arbitrary temperature Americans say is the lowest you can survive
I could be wrong on this, but I think Kelvin is basically required for thermodynamic measurements. Entropy measurements, for example, depend on ratios between temperatures relative to absolute zero. You could still manage using centigrade of course, but you would have to offset all of your temperature measurements by 273.15
Probably a lot of other physical applications that also depend on having an absolute zero reference, but that's the only one I can think of for now.
The freezing point of water is also a great place to zero the scale
I disagree. Realistically the scale shouldn't be able to be negative at all. It doesn't really make any sense for something have a negative temperature.
Imagine if other scales worked that way. An object can't be negative centimeters long. Light can't be negative lumens. You can't score negative % on a test. If you are measuring something you can't have less than nothing.
It's not nothing, it's just below the freezing point of water. Zero energy is zero Kelvin. This is also a bad take because Fahrenheit also goes negative. I suppose you should just start using Kelvin if that is your opinion.
Yeah, the reason you can't stop thinking about it is because it makes no sense but you insist it does so your brain can't stop processing it, trying to figure it out, but every answer you come up with is crap and you know it. It's called cognitive dissonance, you're really not supposed to lean into it.
Which is a surprisingly good approximation for how people feel. 0-100 is pretty survivable, with the mid ranges being most comfortable, and things outside of that range starting to pose serious threats.
50F (or 40-60F) is not the most comfortable for...well, anyone i think. Thats pretty chilly for most people, with 60F being the low side of comfortable (both inside and outside). Most universally comfortable temperature range is probably around 70-80F, which is not really "around the middle" in that 0-100 range. 70F is ideal inside temperature, 80F is a nice warm summer day outside.
Converting from Fahrenheit to Celsius is quite easy. All you need to do is:
import math
import random
import time
def obtain_temperature_scale():
temperature_scales = ["Fahrenheit", "Celsius", "Kelvin", "Rankine", "Réaumur", "Newton", "Delisle", "Rømer"]
return random.choice(temperature_scales)
def create_cryptic_prompts():
cryptic_prompts = [
"Unveil the hidden truth within the scorching embers.",
"Decode the whispers of the arctic winds.",
"Unravel the enigma of thermal equilibrium.",
"Unlock the secrets of the thermometric realm."
]
return random.choice(cryptic_prompts)
def await_user_input(prompt):
print(prompt)
return float(input("Enter the temperature value: "))
def dramatic_pause():
print("Calculating...")
time.sleep(random.uniform(1.5, 3.5))
def convert_to_celsius(fahrenheit):
return (fahrenheit - 32) * (5/9)
def main():
temperature_scale = obtain_temperature_scale()
if temperature_scale == "Fahrenheit":
cryptic_prompt = create_cryptic_prompts()
fahrenheit_temp = await_user_input(cryptic_prompt)
dramatic_pause()
celsius_temp = convert_to_celsius(fahrenheit_temp)
print(f"The temperature in Celsius is: {celsius_temp:.2f}°C")
else:
print("This program only accepts Fahrenheit temperatures.")
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
I think the focus of this is just where the origins of the units are derived. Fahrenheit was invented at a hospital for identifying patients outside of the normal range, Celsius was invented based on the liquid range of water, and Kelvin was invented based on when matter stops
Fahrenheit was invented at a hospital for identifying patients outside of the normal range...
0°F is outside the normal human temperature range? No shit!
You're talking a bunch of bullcrap! Fahrenheit was developed by a German Scientist and he just chose two measurements that were halfway decent to reproduce. That's all there is to it. Got nothing to do with hospitals.
The focus of it is what you are used to.
All scales are basically created equal - they must be, since they measure the same thing and scale the same way. (No pun intended.)
The only difference there can ever be between C/K/F (or R for that matter) is multiplying by one constant and/or adding another.
Yanks use Fahrenheit, grow up with it, and see it used every day. Therefore it is intuitive and logical. To them.
The vast majority of people on Earth - about 95% - actually don't, so it isn't.
That makes the phrasing and underlying assumption pretty characteristically American, and tempting to poke some gentle fun at.
The thing about Fahrenheit is kinda wrong. 0 is when salt water freezes, and 100 was supposedly measured by a woman's body temperature when she was sick.
Most people are inherently biased towards their chosen system. A "water scale" doesn't make sense to fahrenheit users, and a "human scale" is dismissed as even existing by the Celsius users. But hey, if you want to fight, have at it. It's annoying and pointless, but that's what the internet is for.
“human scale” is dismissed as even existing by the Celsius users
Celsius user here.
I find "I'm more used to it, therefore it makes more intuitive sense to me" is a perfectly understandable argument.
The problem with the human scale argument is that it makes it sound completely arbitrary.
To a human there is no objective difference between -1F, 0F or +1F. They are all about the same degree of "cold".
Is there a difference between 19, 20, and 21 Celsius? It's also pretty subtle. Yes, there's a bigger difference than fahrenheit, but I've never cared regardless of scale down to what degree the temperature is. As a fahrenheit user, it's always 10s. 0-10, 10-20, etc.
i mean a lot of measurements are arbitrary necause their manmade. thats creation of measurements in a nutshell. they exist to give people context to conpare to. time is a manmade construct, unit of length is a manmade construct. unit of weight is a manmade construct.
for instance with 1 kilo, tell me the last time a regular person had platinum-iridium ingot. its completely arbitrary.
Also when they describe their fahrenheit human scale it is "0 is really cold" and "100 is really hot", which are subjective and not very informative gauges of anything.
This is interesting but not really justified historically. Celsius predates the concept of absolute zero, and water is very important to our world, not just ourselves.
I'm honestly just so tired. Could I snap my fingers and have the US switch to metric units with everyone understanding them as intuitively as the units they grew up with, I would. I really don't have an emotional attachment to what letter appears next to the temperature.
We couldn't even stick the the unanimously popular bill to abolish DST. This issue is so much further down the list of priorities and yet so much more expensive to change that I don't expect it to come up during my lifetime. To spend the next few decades arguing about it without any hope of a meaningful resolution sounds like my personal hell.
how do you calibrate a fahrenheit thermometer? With celsius it's hilariously trivial, if the thermometer says it's about 0 when you see water freeze, it's correct enough for everyday use.
No, but those describe pretty well the range within people tend to do okay in. Anything lower or higher and you tend to need more specialized gear and have to seriously limit exposure.
You need specialized gear at less than 0F and more than 100F? So totally fine to wear t-shirt and shorts anywhere in between? Just face facts...F is a completely nonsensical system with no basis in any reality.