new temperature scale
temperature is not rocket science.
the Fahrenheit scale has 0 set at the melting point of briny sea water, and he called the average body temp 96 degrees. why 96? so he could mark that on his mercury thermometer and divide it, and divide it again, until he got 96 marks.
state of the art in 1724.
later on, when they had the technology to put 100 evenly spaced marks on a thermometer, the Celsius scale put 0 at the freezing point of water and 100 at the boiling point.
now, every other country uses the Celsius scale except the United States. why don't we? aside from the fact that we're not a bunch of lobsters concerned with the temperature of boiling water, actual surveys asking people the question have determined that the scale is all wrong for us. most people say the biggest problem is that the degrees are too close together. such as the difference between 25 and 30, only 5 degrees, makes the difference between a pleasant day and a hot day.
and, a hot day is only "30"? and 50 is enough to kill off all life on the planet? that's just wacked.
so it becomes apparent that a temperature scale is used, most commonly by far, to determine the weather outside and the comfort of a room inside.
therefore we should finally invent a temperature scale that does exactly that.
I propose to set 0 at the freezing point of water; there's no arguing that. it's most useful on a cold day and there is a palpable change in the air. below 0 tells you how much colder than freezing water and only makes sense.
100 should be put at the perfect comfortable room temperature, which should apply to the same experience outside in the shade. 100 is neither hot nor cold, and any deviation from that tells you instantly which direction it's headed.
furthermore, most people can tell the difference between 2-3 degrees F, which would correspond to roughly 1 degree on this scale, making it perfect again for the use of us flesh-and-blood humans.
exactly where that perfect point is that we call 100, may be determined by observing 100 naked women in a temperature-controlled room to see how comfortable they are. or one at a time. the details can be worked out later.
of course, I would have to call it the buschmaster scale of temperature and the units are B.
what say ye
the Fahrenheit scale has 0 set at the melting point of briny sea water, and he called the average body temp 96 degrees. why 96? so he could mark that on his mercury thermometer and divide it, and divide it again, until he got 96 marks.
state of the art in 1724.
later on, when they had the technology to put 100 evenly spaced marks on a thermometer, the Celsius scale put 0 at the freezing point of water and 100 at the boiling point.
now, every other country uses the Celsius scale except the United States. why don't we? aside from the fact that we're not a bunch of lobsters concerned with the temperature of boiling water, actual surveys asking people the question have determined that the scale is all wrong for us. most people say the biggest problem is that the degrees are too close together. such as the difference between 25 and 30, only 5 degrees, makes the difference between a pleasant day and a hot day.
and, a hot day is only "30"? and 50 is enough to kill off all life on the planet? that's just wacked.
so it becomes apparent that a temperature scale is used, most commonly by far, to determine the weather outside and the comfort of a room inside.
therefore we should finally invent a temperature scale that does exactly that.
I propose to set 0 at the freezing point of water; there's no arguing that. it's most useful on a cold day and there is a palpable change in the air. below 0 tells you how much colder than freezing water and only makes sense.
100 should be put at the perfect comfortable room temperature, which should apply to the same experience outside in the shade. 100 is neither hot nor cold, and any deviation from that tells you instantly which direction it's headed.
furthermore, most people can tell the difference between 2-3 degrees F, which would correspond to roughly 1 degree on this scale, making it perfect again for the use of us flesh-and-blood humans.
exactly where that perfect point is that we call 100, may be determined by observing 100 naked women in a temperature-controlled room to see how comfortable they are. or one at a time. the details can be worked out later.
of course, I would have to call it the buschmaster scale of temperature and the units are B.
what say ye
0
-
We learned three systems of standard temperature measurements in school...
Can you name them all???
Mike0 -
Fahrenheit,Celsius and kelvin 0 -
Fahrenheit, Celsius, Kelvin and Rankine.
Kelvin uses the Celsius scale but puts 0 at "absolute zero", which is the state of zero crystalline entropy.
Rankine does the same thing but with the Fahrenheit scale.0 -
B? Sounds more like BS. 
0 -
??? you read the OP. what's BS about it? 0 -
I only use 3, its either to cold, to hot, or ok............I think they call this the bear-ly comfortable rating 0 -
He Dog wrote:B? Sounds more like BS.
It is complicated enough already.0 -
Oh man I hate the Celsius scale. I am ok with metric system measurements in length(Meters) and weight(Kilograms) even Volumn I can deal with, but when it come to temps I am screwed. When I was working in Africa and I would get the weather report and look at the temps It was hard to convert them to what I understand.
The problem is there is no fast easy was to convert C to F.
Here is what I did:
20C=68F
30C=86F
40C=104F
I memorized these 3 temps and I knew if it was between 20 and 30C it was going to be nice. If between 30-35C its getting hot and over 35C its Africa hot
The formula for converting temps from C to F is: T(?F) = T(?C) ? 1.8 + 32
My other way was to double it and add 25 that also got me close.0 -
The old mnemonic is: "Thirty is hot, twenty is nice, ten is chilly and zero is ice." 0 -
Using a comfort temp of about 72 degrees F, with your scale, water would boil at about 458 degrees or so, which is as nonsensical as the current 212. So your system, would be "logical" for 2 points, one of which is pretty subjective. If you adjust Water to boil at 500 at the upper end, you end up with a "comfort" temp of about 106 degrees and you still get the granularity you're wanting, but 100 degrees would be about 68F, putting the "what is comfortable" subjective point where subjectivity is more warranted. From my standpoint, not much is gained any way you look at it. 0 -
The quick and dirty way I learned is to make two columns one for Celcius that increments by 5 degrees starting at 0. You can then fill in the other column by starting at 32 and then adding 9 to fill in each other point:Sam06 wrote:Oh man I hate the Celsius scale. I am ok with metric system measurements in length(Meters) and weight(Kilograms) even Volumn I can deal with, but when it come to temps I am screwed. When I was working in Africa and I would get the weather report and look at the temps It was hard to convert them to what I understand.
The problem is there is no fast easy was to convert C to F.
Here is what I did:
20C=68F
30C=86F
40C=104F
I memorized these 3 temps and I knew if it was between 20 and 30C it was going to be nice. If between 30-35C its getting hot and over 35C its Africa hot
The formula for converting temps from C to F is: T(?F) = T(?C) ? 1.8 + 32
My other way was to double it and add 25 that also got me close.
C F
0 32
5 41
10 50
15 59
20 68
25 77
30 86
35 95
40 104
45 113
50 1220 -
Mr. Perfect wrote:
The quick and dirty way I learned is to make two columns one for Celcius that increments by 5 degrees starting at 0. You can then fill in the other column by starting at 32 and then adding 9 to fill in each other point:Sam06 wrote:Oh man I hate the Celsius scale. I am ok with metric system measurements in length(Meters) and weight(Kilograms) even Volumn I can deal with, but when it come to temps I am screwed. When I was working in Africa and I would get the weather report and look at the temps It was hard to convert them to what I understand.
The problem is there is no fast easy was to convert C to F.
Here is what I did:
20C=68F
30C=86F
40C=104F
I memorized these 3 temps and I knew if it was between 20 and 30C it was going to be nice. If between 30-35C its getting hot and over 35C its Africa hot
The formula for converting temps from C to F is: T(?F) = T(?C) ? 1.8 + 32
My other way was to double it and add 25 that also got me close.
C F
0 32
5 41
10 50
15 59
20 68
25 77
30 86
35 95
40 104
45 113
50 122
That is nifty MrP0 -
What happened to the Centigrade scale? Did they change the name to some old Swedish star gazer? 0 -
I have 3 Cold Nice Hot 0 -
you got a relative that makes thermometers ????? 0 -
Jim, the nice-nice crowd decided that since one scale was named for Mr Fahrenheit, that it's only "fair" that the other one be named for its originator, too.
The "Celcigrade" scale makes good sense for science because it is based on properties of water, but is less than optimum for people. But it is "metric" and so that's what metric countries use. If we changed to it, we'd get used to it soon enough. Heck, even Canadians manage with it.0 -
jimdeere wrote:What happened to the Centigrade scale? Did they change the name to some old Swedish star gazer?
I wondered the same thing. I was taught 'centigrade' in Canada and in US high school chemistry in the early 70's, then later chastised for using that in college.
Learned 'the triple point of water' (both Celsius and Fahrenheit) only to learn today that it is more defined.
It's nice to grow older and realize that everything I know is wrong. (Hell, I learned just last week that oil isn't from dead dinosaurs, but from sea life and plant material. So much for Dino the dinosaur and Sinclair gas)0 -
So let me get this straight- you are leaving your scale to a consensus of 100 women? 0 -
Warbirds wrote:So let me get this straight- you are leaving your scale to a consensus of 100 women?
Naked women.0 -
Mr. Perfect wrote:Warbirds wrote:So let me get this straight- you are leaving your scale to a consensus of 100 women?
Naked women.
while that sounds good in theory, some women were not meant to be seen naked.......0 -
Mr. Perfect wrote:Using a comfort temp of about 72 degrees F, with your scale, water would boil at about 458 degrees or so, which is as nonsensical as the current 212. So your system, would be "logical" for 2 points, one of which is pretty subjective. If you adjust Water to boil at 500 at the upper end, you end up with a "comfort" temp of about 106 degrees and you still get the granularity you're wanting, but 100 degrees would be about 68F, putting the "what is comfortable" subjective point where subjectivity is more warranted. From my standpoint, not much is gained any way you look at it.
or nonsensical as calling normal freezing water 32F, or boiling water at only 100, and why do you care about boiling water again? why must it have some significant number?
a comfortable temperature isn't very subjective. everybody knows it's somewhere between 72 and 74, and all it takes to nail it down exactly is to get an average of what most people like. which will have at most 2 degrees F deviation for most of the population.Mr. Perfect wrote:The quick and dirty way I learned is to make two columns one for Celcius that increments by 5 degrees starting at 0. You can then fill in the other column by starting at 32 and then adding 9 to fill in each other point:
C F
0 32
5 41
10 50
15 59
20 68
25 77
30 86
35 95
40 104
45 113
50 122
exactly following the equation F=(9/5)C+32.
for every 5C, there is 9F. starting where C=0 and F=32.jimdeere wrote:What happened to the Centigrade scale? Did they change the name to some old Swedish star gazer?
Celcius was also called the Centigrade scale. as in "the temperature is 23 degrees centigrade" which is a misnomer. the Celius scale is a type of centigrade scale, having 100 divisions. being the only one around they called it... "the centigrade scale".
Fahrenheit is a type of bisected scale. he chose two points and bisected multiple times to get a scale from 0 to 96.
before Fahrenheit and his mercury thermometers, there were around 35 different temperature scales, all using water or alcohol and divided in 12 parts because a) thermometers weren't that accurate (precise, yes. accurate, no) and b) people didn't care much what the temperature was:
- no central weather station telling people what temperature it was at the moment
- no weather forecasting like we have today
- hot, cold, and warm were good enough for everybody
- they had no manufacturing technology which took advantage of precise temperatures
- metal workers, cooks, etc had other methods of determining temp and they were very good at it.spasmcreek wrote:you got a relative that makes thermometers ?????
noWarbirds wrote:So let me get this straight- you are leaving your scale to a consensus of 100 women?
observing 100 women. might have to repeat the experiment around different parts of the country.0 -
buschmaster wrote:Mr. Perfect wrote:Using a comfort temp of about 72 degrees F, with your scale, water would boil at about 458 degrees or so, which is as nonsensical as the current 212. So your system, would be "logical" for 2 points, one of which is pretty subjective. If you adjust Water to boil at 500 at the upper end, you end up with a "comfort" temp of about 106 degrees and you still get the granularity you're wanting, but 100 degrees would be about 68F, putting the "what is comfortable" subjective point where subjectivity is more warranted. From my standpoint, not much is gained any way you look at it.
or nonsensical as calling normal freezing water 32F, or boiling water at only 100, and why do you care about boiling water again? why must it have some significant number?
a comfortable temperature isn't very subjective. everybody knows it's somewhere between 72 and 74, and all it takes to nail it down exactly is to get an average of what most people like. which will have at most 2 degrees F deviation for most of the population.Mr. Perfect wrote:The quick and dirty way I learned is to make two columns one for Celcius that increments by 5 degrees starting at 0. You can then fill in the other column by starting at 32 and then adding 9 to fill in each other point:
C F
0 32
5 41
10 50
15 59
20 68
25 77
30 86
35 95
40 104
45 113
50 122
exactly following the equation F=(9/5)C+32.
for every 5C, there is 9F. starting where C=0 and F=32.jimdeere wrote:What happened to the Centigrade scale? Did they change the name to some old Swedish star gazer?
Celcius was also called the Centigrade scale. as in "the temperature is 23 degrees centigrade" which is a misnomer. the Celius scale is a type of centigrade scale, having 100 divisions. being the only one around they called it... "the centigrade scale".
Fahrenheit is a type of bisected scale. he chose two points and bisected multiple times to get a scale from 0 to 96.
before Fahrenheit and his mercury thermometers, there were around 35 different temperature scales, all using water or alcohol and divided in 12 parts because a) thermometers weren't that accurate (precise, yes. accurate, no) and b) people didn't care much what the temperature was:
- no central weather station telling people what temperature it was at the moment
- no weather forecasting like we have today
- hot, cold, and warm were good enough for everybody
- they had no manufacturing technology which took advantage of precise temperatures
- metal workers, cooks, etc had other methods of determining temp and they were very good at it.spasmcreek wrote:you got a relative that makes thermometers ?????
noWarbirds wrote:So let me get this straight- you are leaving your scale to a consensus of 100 women?
observing 100 women. might have to repeat the experiment around different parts of the country.
Freezing water and boiling water are easy points to use to calibrate a scale. That's why. Neither is particularly interesting aside from that, but those points are less than arbitrary since they are the basis for at least one temperature scale that's been in use for decades.0 -
You forgot Kelvin 0 -
I created an EZ color code (soon to be adopted by the Snowflake movement. AOC will be the weather girl!).
Note: New reference numbers (left column) included for the anally retentive.
Here is what the Channel 10 weather report will sound like:
"Temperatures were in the low greens today and expected to be in the mid blues tonight and in the upper blues tomorrow.
Good night."
Bustedknee?s Temperature Scale
+5--- A/C hugger ? automobile or building (currently 110F)
+4--- No pants - shade umbrella (currently 100F)
+3--- No shirt - SPF 50 (currently 90F)
+2--- Short sleeve shirt (currently 65F)
+1--- Long sleeve shirt (currently 55F)
0--- Don?t Worry ? Be Happy (currently 45F)
-1--- Layered shirts - cap (currently 40F)
-2--- Jacket - sweater (currently 35F)
-3--- Hat - gloves (currently 30F)
-4--- Parka - snowsuit (currently 20F)
-5--- Long underwear ? electric socks (currently 15F)
-6--- Facemask ? electric undies (currently 10F)
-7--- Peppermint Snapps - Hot Chocolate (currently 0F)
-8--- Bare flesh freezes - beer gets chunky (currently -20F)
-9--- Eyelids freeze shut ? bare genitals freeze & fall off (currently -40F)
-10--- Pee freezes in mid air ? Who pees up at any temp? (currently -60F)0 -
okay, you set 0 at 45F, and 100 somewhere around the melting point of aluminum. brilliant! :arrow: :? 0 -
How about degrees R (for Redneck) ???
Zero is the temperature of a perfectly cold beer.
100 is the temp of a perfect day to take off and go fishing.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
26 comments