Metric is absolutely silly for real-life measurements.
Metric is very useful for decimal measurements, like you would input into a CAD machine, or for use in precise engineering schematic measurements, or for use in mathematical calculations using floating points. So, it's used in science.
For real hands on stuff? Absolutely silly. Base 2 system is superior, and 1/32" has better resolution than 1 mm (which is 1/25.4"). If you're talking about getting into measuring micrometers you're going on a snipe hunt.
The braindead crusade for everything metric has caused a large loss in efficiency across North America. Double the tools since some braindead countries use metric parts, double the hassle, less efficient output.
I'd like to hear a counter-argument in favour of metric. There really isn't one. All the #1 professors who do real stuff agree with me, like my old professor who is on the board of NASA JPL. You want to go to space? Engineer your parts in Imperial or suffer the consequences. Where's Europe's space force?
Just because you are used to something, doesn't mean it's good. If you want to go into the mathematics rabbit hole, I have bad news for you:
Any counting system which is a consistent sum of Polynoms with greater or equal base than 2 is homomorph with the base 2 counting system. Now, imperial British bootlicker system isn't homomorph to the base 2 counting system, hence why scientists or better said most of the world uses SI. You beat yourself
Historically, people chose base 10 system over other systems (binar, hexa etc.) because counting everyday is easier and you don't need high amount of print ink to represent a relatively small number, say for example 10 in decimal is 1010 in base 2 system, easily double the amount of digits.
What gets even funnier is that the bootlicker British imperial system uses SI to quantify itself nowadays
This post was edited by babun1024 on Mar 8 2025 05:26am