I mean, if we want to be rational about these things, the zero point of temperat

Source date (UTC): 2024-04-13 15:04:56 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1779163871409811510

Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1779161245188338071

IN REPLY TO:

Unknown author

Fahrenheit vs Celsius Debate:
1) Because mercury is the measure rather than water, because mercury doesn’t freeze. It makes perfect sense. 😉
2) Fahrenheit originally defined his scale with zero as the coldest temperature achievable using a mixture of ice, water, and salt. This solution of brine was used to establish the freezing point of water. So Fahrenheit is a more accurate measure of the lower limit of water’s natural ability to freeze. It makes perfect sense.
3) Fahrenheit is more precise at human scales of temperature sesitivity without having to resort to decimal numbers. We should ask the other question as why Celsius didn’t use 0-1000 instead of 0-100 given the sensitivity of humans to gradual changes in temperature. As such Fahrenheit makes perfect sense.
4) unlike measures of length and volume we don’t require a base ten measurement of temperature because we don’t need to manage scale independence.
5) I find the entire debate ridiculous. The imperial system uses human scale measurements for human scale actions. The Celsius system is easier to use for beyond-human scale measurements (science), because it’s a consistent base ten set of measurements.

Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1779161245188338071