Comment on temperature

<- View Parent
imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Idk how your A relates to mine, if anything that’s more about the frame of reference, not the granularity. Let me try to clarify.

You have to use negative numbers more frequently with Celsius > Celsius has a less intuitive frame of reference (I will concede that at least it’s better than being in triple digits all the time like Kelvin)

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

source
Sort:hotnewtop