this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
904 points (98.1% liked)

People Twitter

4988 readers
2261 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying.
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Sure. How much does water in a 1ft × 2ft × 3ft aquarium weigh?

In metric, an equivalent calculation is 30 cm × 60 cm × 90 cm = 3 × 6 × 9 dm^3 = 162 𝑙 ≡ 162 kg of water, and if you're pedantic, the weight is around 1620 N or closer to 1590 N for 𝑔 = 9.8 m·s^-2^. All calculated in my head.

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

A cubic foot is 7.48 gallons, close enough to 7.5. 1 gallon of water is 8.33 lbs ≈ 25/3.

6 * 7.5 = 45 gallons

45 * 25/3 = 375 lbs -- easy mental math. Sure, the "accurate" answer is 373.87 lbs, but the aquarium probably isn't filled with distilled water, perfectly dimensionally accurate, or filled to that exact capacity.

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (9 children)

A cubic foot is 7.48 gallons, close enough to 7.5

1 gallon of water is 8.33 lbs ≈ 25/3.

25/3

Oh god this is what we mean

[–] ultracritical@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's only arbitrarily easy since water has a density of 1 kg/l in metric, as it was designed to do so. If you happened to know the density of water is 62.2 lb/ft^3 then the equation is roughly 123*60 which is 360 lb. 372 if you can actually paid attention to what common core was trying to teach. If the material was anything other then water the math would be just as difficult to do in imperial or metric.

Metric is still far superior as the harmonized units make density in particular much easier to convert between. About the only thing imperial is better at is thread pitch of screws. I will also maintain that when describing human temperatures for weather Fahrenheit is a superior scale, but that's just more personal preference and experience then any rational basis.

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

It's only arbitrarily easy since water has a density of 1 kg/l in metric, as it was designed to do so.

it was designed to do so

That's also what we mean

I will also maintain that when describing human temperatures for weather Fahrenheit is a superior scale

That's one where I'd say it's almost entirely personal preference. Water freezing being at zero is handy because it's nice to know when there's ice/snow outside, but that's also something you could just learn to remember in Fahrenheit too. Doesn't really matter with that system. Kelvin and Celsius being bros is nice but it's extremely rare that I use that so eh.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)