I can feel the difference between 32F and -32F. Humans in the equatorial regions will never feel 0F but they will feel over 100F. Also, the humidity is a large component of how humans feel temperature as well. Heat indices are more accurate as to how humans sense temperature. But some people can’t stand cold temperatures that others can and vice versa with heat. Temperature is a scientific parameter and must be repeatable and standardized, not based on comfort level of disparate humans.
@@hearmeout9138 For most temperate regions, 0 F is about as cold as it gets, and 100 F about as warm as it gets. F is the way to go when reporting temperature or in casual discussion. The way it feels is in the numbers. No interpretation needed. For graphing changes in the earth's climate I'd rather Kelvin be used as that would more accurately reflect the magnitude of the change.
Ah, so that's why C is a useless system, thank you for making it so easy to understand why, you forgot to say anything about conversion tho, 3:46 explains why Fahrenheit is much better
@@xp7575 My mom taught me that 28 years ago to help answer a possible question on some standardized test in high school (SATs? can't remember). And it worked! There was a question which that poem helped me answer correctly! But yes Fahrenheit is much better as explained in my other comment
In fahrenheit: at 0 you're really cold, at 100 you're really hot. In Celcius: at 0 you're cold, at 100 you're dead. in Kelvin: at 0 you're dead, at 100 you're dead.
@@wendylcs4283 Longer than you would think. But if you are going to be outside for any period of time, you should be wearing a coat of some kind at 0°C let alone 0°F.
@@jds1275 it’s thrown off an astonishing amount. Even having taken college level chemistry and thermodynamics, I still had it set in my head that water boils at 212, period. Turns out where I live, it boils 15 degrees (F) lower than that. At the highest elevation I’ve boiled water for coffee, it’s a full 26 degrees difference. That’s 1/7th of the usual range between freezing and boiling!
Personally, I don't think that part matters about the body's core temperature because it can vary in humans by a few degrees Fahrenheit. I think however, it just works better from a standpoint of knowing when your feverish 100, is close to the upper limit of what humans can handle.
Actually... [insert ackchyually meme here] Fahrenheit intended for normal human body temp to be 90... and then 96. Fahrenheit based his model on an older model (Romer Scale) that has brine freeze at 0, water freeze at 7.5 and body temp at 22.5. Fahrenheit started by multiplying that scale by 4 to give more fine-grain detail and eliminate fractions. This put temps at those three temps at 0/30/90. Then he tweaked the scale up slightly to make it 0/32/96. This was done so that there was 64 degrees between freezing and human body temp. Why was this important? Because now you can easily mark degrees on your thermometer. Freeze water and mark your thermometer. Check your body temp and mark your thermometer. Now you have 32 and 96 recorded. Now mark the exact middle between those two marks. Now mark the exact middle between the three marks. Now mark the exact middle between those 5 marks... do this three more times and you've now got exact 1-degree Fahrenheit marks on your thermometer.
I never thought about the fact that 0°F to 100°F describes the livable range for mankind. Great point! Up until now, Celsius made more sense to me, being based on water freezing & boiling, a physical case.
This is amazing! I've never considered this. I think the value of this video is not in its debate about F vs C but in the illumination of how arbitrary both scales are! Thanks for the perspective Kyle. We nerds should all start using Kelvin in everyday talk. "Wow, should be over 300 this weekend. Lets plan a beach day!" "Hey guys, the temps haven't been over 270 in over a month! The ice has to be good to go. Lets get a hockey game together soon." Where my Dvorak users at? Ya'll down to convert to K?
Metric is better than imperial for doing calculations and conversions, but if you're doing manual work there can be benefits to using using like feet and inches with divisions of 12 because it divides evenly more ways than 10 does. (1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 versus 1, 2, 5, and 10.) It's the same reason that our time system is not based on 10s. You can use more simple numbers without using decimals.
Yeah it’s no accident, they chose 12 inches to the foot. It’s an easy thing to divide in half and thirds and in quarters. Doing that for 10 is not pretty especially not thirds.
Exactly! Same with 5280 feet in 1 mile. I think it was chosen that way because 5280 has so many different divisors, that the mile could easily be subdivided into halves, thirds, quarters, fifths, sixths, etc.
Except when using tools like sockets - Metric has no in between sizes. If 10mm is too small, try 11mm. In inches, how finely are you dividing the fraction? 1/8 or 7/16 or 5/32? I have on occasion had to go purchase an additional socket as it was in /32 instead of /16 or /8.
If you are doing sloppy Manual work sure count in feet, considering a human foot can vary from about 20 to more than 50cms in sizes good luck with that.
When Fahrenheit found his scale he based it on the temperature at which seawater froze. That became zero degrees. He set a mark for the freezing of fresh water, which he found at 32. To set the temperature of the 'opposite' of freezing: boiling. On a circle, opposites are 180 degrees apart. 32 degrees (freezing) and 212 degrees (boiling) put his scale in that 'human experience' zone which you describe. As another comments here, it is the scale that humans feel/experience.
IIRC, Fahrenheit himself (A GERMAN, not British OR American!) wanted 100 degrees to be the normal human temperature, since it's 98.6 F- He was damn close. Fahrenheit is the HUMAN relatable scale. Also, I remember when Celsius was called Centigrade and Kilohertz was called kilocycles. Then one day they changed, and no one told me. Yes, I'm old. LOL.
its not human relatable, its like caveman relatable. cooking revolves around boiling water, so actually on a practical level for everything EXCEPT WEATHER, celsius works better. and celsius isnt even bad for weather, because 0 celsius is a good point for snow.
This is why they say if your temperature is 100 or greater, you have a fever. There actually is some variation though slight with humans with their core temperature. So it technically is still a human scale from that standpoint. Personally, I kind of always wish we had had some sort of hybrid. Between Celsius and Fahrenheit. I prefer everything above freezing with Fahrenheit. But I do like that 0°c when it comes to freezing. Although it is interesting I think 0° f. Is the same as what a freezer should be. It would just be nice if they hit some kind of rounded numbers.
For cooking, have to say celsius is by far the superior measure. Water being the main component of most foods, the scale between freezing and boiling is ideal.
I agree that the metric system for certain mathematical applications is better than the imperical system. Especially in Geotechnical Engineering. It was far easier to calculate soil densities, sive analysis, water content, etc. But any other applications I prefer using imperical.
I find it easy to take a "ladder" method to manage C vs F. By that I mean memorizing a handful of pairs: 0C = 32F, 10C = 50F, 20C = 68F, 30C = 86F, 40C = 104F. When I see a temperature I can see which "rungs of the ladder" it falls between. Noticing that each increment of 10C = 18F led me to this method also.
I tell my Canadian relatives this exact idea all the time. They are reluctant converts to the metric system as is, still preferring to use imperial measurements for things like height, weight and short distances. But they have completely bought in on the centigrade scale for temps. They spend half the year living in below zero temperatures because of this now.
I completely agree that metric is superior, with the one exception being Fahrenheit, which I actually love! I swear you are just like me. Just one correction. We use the US Customary System, not the Imperial System. It always bugged me when people called the US Customary system "Imperial." Great video!
Right there with you on the miles thing. I KNOW what a mile is. Whenever a distance is given in kilometers I have to try and remember what % of a mile a kilometer is. But I also prefer inches (based on human dimensions--your thumb knuckle), yards (based on the distance from his nose to his fingertip of some old king) to meters, and gallons to liters. As the song goes, I'm old-fashioned.
@jag92949 Celsius is a waste. Its never 100 C outside anywhere but in many places it can get to 100 F. Celsius also overuses the minus sign. When I think negative temperatures, it should be Arctic levels of cold, not just barely cold for snow
I'm sure if you grew up with Celcius, 35 sounds hot, but to me, who has lived in the Southern US, that number is just not big enough to describe how #$!% hot it gets in July and August. 95 does the job much better. Of course you also need the humidity percentage to describe the full amount of miserableness. I agree the rest of the metric system is better. I expect we will continue to slowly adopt the metric system, but keep imperial for some things, like they do in the UK.
I drive a German car, and I feel Celsius is better for understanding the temp gauge in the car. You know right away 100 in boiling, so any temp over 100 your relying on the cooling system to hold more pressure as the water in the system is wanting to undergo a phase change. With proper coolant the boiling point can be raised, which is why the temp gauge red line is at 110-120. But even if you put straight water in your car you can understand pretty easily that 100+ is pushing your luck.
@@JimmyMon666 Pretty sure the laws of physics have not changed in the last 40 years. You haven't experienced the an over heating issue because of better, younger parts, not that water started boiling at a different temperature. Water below boiling is still putting less pressure on cooling system components. a side note. As a mechanic, I wouldn't trust modern car cooling system components to last 40 years. most are plastic and they crack at some point. Plastic hates being heat cycled. Replacing all hoses and plastic components is pretty common on "modern cars" when they hit 10 years old. This wasn't a thing back in the 90s when everything was made of aluminum.
The delineations between degrees is smaller in Fahrenheit, yielding greater accuracy of temperature. Of course we can always add decimals, but... Celsius is like a gauge or tape rule, where the accuracy of the device is limited to the interval of marks. Delta 1 degree in F is a smaller change than Delta 1 degree in C.
As an American engineer, this got me quite frustrated. Your tagline of “science uses Kelvin” is a major oversimplification. A change of 1 degC is the exact same as a change of 1 degK. Most calculations I’ve done involving temperature are done to calculate changes in temperature rather than absolute temperature. In these scenarios, science uses Celsius and Kelvin interchangeably. In fact, since the majority of heat exchangers, insulation, radiators, etc. are used on Earth rather than space, change in DegC is the most common. And the interdependence of units in Metric connecting volume, energy, and temperature make DegC the absolute best unit for connecting people to the physical world around us.
It’s a measurement of kinetic energy present in matter. It should never be negative. Both Celsius and Fahrenheit arbitrarily chose the freezing point of water as the reference point for their scale but the universe isn’t exclusively made up of water. Kelvin is the only rational temperature scale.
👍🏼 Got give a shout out for the foot. In a mixed marriage (American/Imperial + French/Metric), I'm very familiar with and can use both freely. Of course I'm biased being American! But the foot is so human-scale. Having nothing (that's really used) between the centimeter and the meter just feels awkward. Perhaps that's why dozens of countries who have switched to metric still use feet to measure things, such as height and depth. Also, English is a syllable-efficient language. We like short words, which puts some metric terms at an inheritant disadvantage. 10 lbs sounds nicer than 5 kg. 6 miles sounds better than 10 kilometers.
Fahrenheit is also a finer scale. You can say 71F, but you would never say 21.67 C. You would have to say 21C or 22C, which would be actually closer to 70F and 72F. But really it is 71F you are trying to describe.
@stevemarvin will it depends on how precise you want to be. It's possible you heard it on TV say if it was from a weather station maybe I don't know... I'm just saying that in normal conversation people are not that precise.
If you have a work crew (agriculture, construction, road work, etc) then it is reasonable to expect workers to be able to perform their jobs between 0 and 100 F (with precautions; proper clothing in cold, plenty of water breaks in the heat), but it is not reasonable to expect outdoor work when the temp is below 0 f and above 100 f. People can die of frostbite and heatstroke, respectively, even with proper precautions outside that range. Yes, you might live in Alaska or Saudi Arabia where the weather frequently goes beyond that range, but 95% of humanity may never go beyond either extreme.
It is important that 0c is the freezing temperature of water, because water falls from the sky like a lot. It gets cold a lot where I live and it’s good to be able to tell at a glance if it’s going to be wet or icy.
It's a bit of a misnomer to say Celsius is not used in science, I use it several times per day at work. Granted I work in water chemistry. I do find it useful to know how close my baths are to phase change transitions. That being said I have an excellent understanding of how hot water is at 60 C. You tell me it 32 C outside and I'm completely confused.
And the increments are identical in Kelvin and °C, only the offset differs by 273. So, if you need a temperature difference it's the same, no matter which scale.
Thanks Geo Guy. I'm in a scientific field professionally with an advanced science degree. I understand the use of K and C in engineering, science (in general), and architecture. And I agree metrics are more accurate and useful even in daily usage (although I still prefer knowing the imperial lengths and so on; it's very simple to get an approximation of KM to mile so no big deal for me. Just personal preference. But now you've given me a good defense against my Celsius snob friends that stands up in practical terms. I'd never try to use F in a laboratory but....heck as far as "How's the weather today?" I surely can proudly say it's going to get up to 80F and not feel like I need to defend myself!
As a Canadian who was growing up with the 1975 switch to Celsius, I know both equally as well, both intuitively and mathematically. 0F is bloody cold for Sarnia on the 43rd. and 100F is way too hot. Americans complain about the cold that comes from Canada. Well as a Canadian I want to complain about last summers heat home from the U.S. with many +40C days. Keep your heat way and we'll try to keep the cold away...which usually is coming from Siberia anyhow!
Canadian here. I was born in 1953 and we switched to metric in 1977 (when I was 24) so I’m fluent in Fahrenheit and Celsius. As a practical matter they’re pretty much the same. If you say the temperature is going to be 70F (in the U.S.) or 20C anywhere else, everyone knows you don’t need a coat.
I used F only my entire life (I'm 60) but in the last couple of years I started to embrace becoming Celsius 'fluent,' because I have a buddy in another country whom I chat with regularly. And we're always talking about the weather in our respective locations so I've made the habit of communicating it in C, so now I'm getting pretty comfortable with it. And as for all other metric measurements being superior, absolutely. I never could multiply fractions (etc) as a kid or adult and metric has been saving my butt for years in that regard lol. When old codgers complain about metric being "too complicated," I explain that our systems, if applied to money, a dollar would be 132 cents (as in ounces per gallon) and then some will see the light!
I've been saying the same thing for years! I agree that metric is better in every way except temperature. We can go ahead and get rid of feet and miles, but they'll never take Fahrenheit from me.
The only reason we prefer Fahrenheit in this country is that we're used to it. Celsius is fine, but it's not something we grew up with. In Europe, it's the opposite. We know that 100°F is very hot; in Europe, they know that 40°C is very hot. Six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Celsius and Fahrenheit both have their advantages. I grew up with Celsius but have a working understanding of Fahrenheit due to some time spent in the USA. In my opinion the Fahrenheit vs Celsius debate is just needless polemic .... Mmetric vs imperial would be a much better topic. Not because imperial is bad, it isn't! But metric is much more pragmatic. It saves so much time and worries when you have to convert or scale.
As an engineering student, if I'm given a problem where temperature is a factor, Celsius is a lot easier to work with and what I'll always prefer. If I need to know what to wear, I'm using Fahrenheit because it makes intuitive sense, the 0 to 100 portion tells me how comfortable it is, anything above or below that tells me how much faster I'm gonna die outside.
0°C being the temperature that water freezes at is the best feature of the Celsius scale. As someone who lives in an area that yo-yos above and below that line, I can tell you that transitioning from above to below 0°C is the most drastic shift in conditions. So much so, that it deserves to be the point that every other temperature is measured as above or below it. This is the temperature where rain falls instead as snow, and where wet roads turn into sheets of ice. Seeing the forecast of rain during the day, then falling to a low of -2°, instantly prepares me for what to expect having crossed that threshold.
I live in an area where the temp plunge well below 0°F and in summer will reach the low 100's. Zero Celsius (32°F) is a largely meaningless number. It's just a warm January day. Nothing really important happens, except that you might need to scrape your windows. Even the roads don't get icy at that point, because the we start dumping salt. Zero *Fahrenheit*, however, is very significant. It's when temps get dangerously cold, and--importantly--when roads actually get dangerously icy because salt brine becomes ineffective.
@@michaelwald6671"we start dumping salt" is the meaning. Despite that, it probably depends on how much downpour (soaking into the remaing snow, covering grid or washing away the salt) and how much yo-yo you have in the region.
@@michaelwald6671 sidewalks in cities do get icy and slippery already at -1°C (at least where i live they do) ... and having to scrape your windows in the morning or not might make quite the difference in when you have to leave the house i imagine
Fahrenheit also benefits because it has a smaller unit of measurement. You can make finer adjustments to temperature without having to break out the decimals, and people that are very specific about the temperature while they’re sleeping will tell you that’s VERY important
In general, I'm sympathetic to your point, and people get too worked up about their units of measure. Almost all of them are arbitrary, and the only relative advantage is convenience. Being American, I'm inclined to agree that the Fahrenheit scale is more intuitive, and better fits the climates where the overwhelming majority of humans live. But the one advantage of Celsius that you asked for is that a temperature change of one degree Celsius is the same as as a temperature change of one degree Kelvin. That means Celcius temperatures can be plugged directly into many scientific formulas based on the SI units you conceded are better for most purposes. As long as the formula uses a change in temperature instead of absolute temperature, degrees C is fine. I daresay that most temperature calculations used outside theoretical physics deal with temperature changes rather than absolute temperatures.
I agree, metric is best. As for the “sciences” or “hard science” using Kelvin vs C that’s a pretty narrow niche. I work in the medical industry and everything we do is in C. I switched to C a few years ago and got used to it pretty quickly. I pretty much think in C now.
Most human beings only care about temperature in term of "weather." Specifically, at what temperature, humans start to feel cold enough to catch a "cold". Zero degrees Celsius is the perfect barometer for that. The next most important use of temperature for the average person is for boiling and cooking food. In which case, the boiling point of water is essential. 100 degrees Celsius is perfect for that. Fahrenheit is not user-friendly by comparison.
I think the biggest flaw with Celsius is the degree size. Fahrenheit degrees are much smaller so things can be fine tuned more precisely. Celsius needs to be replaced with a “duocentigrade” with 200 degrees between the freezing and boiling point of water. That would make it even finer than the 180 degrees for Fahrenheit. It would be easy to get because it is just Celsius x2. And it would be easier for people to convert between it and Fahrenheit. To convert from Fahrenheit to duocentrigrade: 1. Subtract 32 degrees to adjust the freezing point. 2. Using the 9x table, find the closest number on the table and add that to the result of step 1. For example, 75 Fahrenheit to Celsius 75-32=43. The closest number to 43 on the 9x table is 45 (which is 9x5) so add 5 to 43 to get 48. If you divide duocentigrade by two to get Celsius 48/2=24. Which is very close to the 23.889 you would get using an online converter. To convert duocentigrade into Fahrenheit: 1. Round to the nearest 10. 2. Subtract one for each 10. 3. Add 32. For example 75 duocentigrade (which would be 37.5 Celsius) rounds up to 80, so subtract 8 from 75 which equals 68. Add 32 to get 100. If you use an online converter you see that 37.5 Celsius is 99.5 Fahrenheit. Again off by less than a single degree and easy to do in one’s head.
Naa. People think writing inch fractions as vulgar fractions mostly nonesensical. Decimal fractions are fine. E.g. 0.125 inch = 125 minch would be magnificent.
As an american living in Europe, I rely on that trivia fact I learned years ago that body temp is 37°C, and kinda go from there on vibes, of course with the 0° and 100° in my mind as hardcores.
Kyle's hypothesis has been tested. Canada switched to Celsius in 1975. Within a few years Fahrenheit had disappeared from weather reports. It's still common in cooking, though -- pretty much universal. Preserving older recipes and using recipes from American publications has encouraged that, as did the continued use of Fahrenheit stoves. So my conclusion is -- Celsius won't kill ya. Keep using Fahrenheit if you want.
I'm a little late, but the Imperial length/distance scale is pretty nice if you know how to use fractions and don't want to keep pulling out a calculator while you're working.
Both scales are pretty easy. For weather Celcius is more centered on the freezing mark 0°C/ 32°F while Fahrenheit is centered on a mild temperature of 50°F/10°C. The way I always looked at it: Cool temperature is single digits Celsius above freezing 1°C - 9°C or below 50°F. Cold is negative single digits Celsius at or below freezing 0°C/ 32°F. Very cold is negative double digits Celsius -10°C/14°F and below. Mild or warm is double digits Celsius at least 10°C/50°F and over.
I disagree! Celsius is great, you get to work around the zero and the 100 which is practical. I wouldn’t say water freezing and boiling are only scientific things, they serve a purpose in your everyday life too. Temperature below zero means that the car should have winter tires, the kids should have padded clothes, main water connectors that aren’t in use during winter should be turned off etc. Temperature above 100 means that bacteria dies, the oil temperature in your car is ok, your sauna is too hot etc.
I think it mainly comes down to what you're used to growing up. Like the Fahrenheit scale feels alien to me as I grew up and am used to Celsius when talking about temperature. It's probably the same for Americans looking at Celsius when they've been in contact with only Fahrenheit (except science classes) in their life. What I think is good about using Celsius in your daily life is that 0 indicates that surfaces might freeze over so you need to be careful when going outside, driving, riding your bike etc. Another thing is that Celsius uses the same scale as Kelvin, just with a 273.15 difference, meaning that conversion is much easier than from F to K
I heard it was developed on the basis that 0ºF was the temperature where meat and other perishable food could be safely stored long term, and 100ºF was the best estimate at the time of normal human body temperature.
I believe it's just what you're accustomed to. If you grew up in the USA, you're more likely to understand the F° range vs C°. Likewise, the reverse is true if you grew up in other parts of the world. However, there is a larger increase in intensity between a 1°C vs 1°F increase in temperature.
It's entirely up to what you're used to. To me and I'm sure 90% of other Celsius users would agree, that Celsius feels intuitive. 18 degrees sounds normal. 35 degrees sounds unbearably hot. And 6 degrees sounds very cold. The same way you say that we "already know it" because 0-100 farenhieght roughly describes a normal range of temperatures. I would suggest that Americas "already know Celsius" it's the same thing but (climate dependent) the normal range of temperatures is 0-40. It's no less intuitive than farenhieght. The only advantage I suppose is that you can be more granular since the range of normal temperatures is wider you can be more specific, which is helpful in getting a more accurate idea of the temperature when humidity, sun and wind have such a strong effect on how a given temperature actually feels.
You didn't even touch on the fact that degrees in F are smaller, which is better, because they can represent the temperature more precisely. To your point, I figured out that a better way for me to anchor C to F than 0C = 32F is 10C = 50F. That's a much more useful conversion because it's based on what's a normal temperature, the whole basis of the F scale, as you said!
It is easy to convert Celsius to kelvin, just add absolute temperature that is 273.15. Celsius is highly logical, Zero means freezing, 18 to 25 is pleasant, 30+ is hot 35+ very hot, 40+is heat wave. For. Those living in a tropical region, Celsius is the best. Fahrenheit has many range, that human doesnot need. We just need, is it freezing , boiling, at what pressure (cooking). Sorry, I will take Celsius
Sigh. This old saw. "50 being right in the middle is not going to be either hot nor cold, it's going to be pretty mild." This is not true for anyone brought up in a temperate climate. 70°F is comfortable for a normal person. 50°F would be at least sweater weather for the average person. 75°F would be still be comfortable, not warm, to most people. 100°F would be heat warnings in most places. 0°F would be "you will die without proper equipment" in most places. 32°F is the freezing point of water and very, not kinda, cold. If you want a glimpse into madness, go lookup the actual reasons for the specific 0°F and, well, other measurements of the Fahrenheit scale (there is no specific reason for its 100°F as far as I could find). It's completely arbitrary lunacy that doesn't seem to even have a consistent explanation, other than being consistently bizarre. I live in the US and use Fahrenheit regularly but I don't go around trying to justify it.
@@GeographyKing You literally just made a video justifying the Fahrenheit scale. I'm not making this a "my system's better than your system" debate. I didn't defend any particular scale in my comment. Use whatever system you want. But, the Fahrenheit scale is absolutely not a scale for humans. Like I said, I mostly use the Fahrenheit scale but I don't defend it because it's not any better than any other scale and there are clear drawbacks. And, seriously, read the wiki page on how the Fahrenheit scale was calibrated. I defy you to claim it's a rational system after reading its history. Its multiple choice history.
5:45 Celsius is a Kelvin scale tared/rooted on ice point. That's it. They are the same! What's getting hotter by 5 degrees K is getting hotter by 5 degrees C. Relatively, C and K are always 273.15 degrees apart. So, when working with differences, there's no need to convert C to K at all. Practically, "zero" is a signal to switch to winter clothes and tires. It gets icy. And we too are made of water.
Well Kyle as a 73 yr. old Canadian I am obviously very familiar with Celsius and Fahrenheit ( and Kelvin for that matter ) since we used the Imperial System until the mid 70's . But even in grade school in the 1950's I understood the Metric System since it was so basic even though I could not relate it to real life uses . Your point about Fahrenheit is interesting and the fact that each "degree" is less of an actual increase in heat makes it more accurate in whole degrees One thing that always puzzled me is " why 32 and 212 ? Why not 25 & 200 , or 50 & 250 ? Or if you contend that boiling point is not relatable then make freezing 100 degrees or better still make freezing " 0 " and so called room temperature " 100 " .
Sorry Kyle but using the 'common man' usage is a pretty flimsy argument for me! If you've grown up in Europe the you just know if it's 35C then it's going to be a sweltering day and likewise if they say it's going to be 5C then you know to crank up the heating and put a sweater on under your cost when you go out.
The reason given in effect is only that Fahrenheit is better for US citizens because they're familiar with it. In short: continue using what you're accustomed to (which is fine of course). Neither valid pros nor cons given.
I think what Kyle is saying is that it’s designed for common man. I know people are used to it but people can get used to almost anything. 0-100 makes more sense from a design perspective. 0 - 40 does not.
@@jeffwatson7315 Not only a 0 to 100 scale more intuitive than a 0 to 40 scale, the 0 to 40 scale also doesn't cover the habitable environment as well; at 0 degree Celsius you don't even see snow.
@@chumanho yeah. but you see snow right below 0 C, which makes more sense than saying "it;s below 32 F, there might be ice on the road". 32 it's just arbitrary
@@kostasjezuz4846 That's not a problem at all. below 0C you know it's below freezing below 32F you know it's below freezing Either way it doesn't make it easier/harder to tell when it's freezing.
For us in Canada, if precipitation is coming and it's -1 it's going to snow, if it's +1 it's going to rain. Very handy. Everything you described seems to be what you're used to. I know if it's +35 degrees it's going to be bloody hot because that's what I grew up with. If it's -35 it's very cold. Each degree difference means more I guess.
THanKS for the great and detailed description of Fahrenheit. I've always liked it better than celsius because C requires using decimal points more often.
You're explaining very well what I've tried to tell people. Once I was traveling through Canada and I saw a national TV weather forecast while I was there. The high temps on the map ranged from 19 in Whitehorse and Yellowknife to 23 in Toronto and Montreal. Not much variance on the scale! Also, you can dial in the temperature you want in modern cars. If you choose the Fahrenheit scale, it goes up one number at a time: 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73. If you choose the Celsius scale, the jumps are too big from one number to the next, so it goes up half a degree at a time: 18.5. 19.0, 19.5, 20.0, 20.5. After those two experiences, I came to the conclusion that Fahrenheit is better for everyday usage.
I agree that the Fahrenheit scale is better suited to common human experience - whether one feels hot or cold, and in fields such as cooking. One thing about reporting weather in Fahrenheit is that there's simply more resolution, typically a factor of 2x. Of course one can use decimals but that is somehow less intuitive than simple counting numbers. I'll always think of temps in the human experience range in terms of degrees F. Below that it's better to use Kelvin, as when discussing cryogenic liquids and solids. Above the boiling point of water, I prefer to think in degrees C rather than degrees F although I know that K is the proper unit.
I'm gonna be the european in the room and try to disprove your point, so here goes: 1. 'Fahrenheit is better for the common man'. I think that's totally based on personal opinion. People who use Celsius generally know that 0 is (literally) freezing. 10 is coldish. 20 is cool. 30 is hot and 40 is too hot. It makes intuitive sense to us just like the 25,50,75,100 system makes sense to you. I think you (and I about celsius) just feel like these systems make sense because we grew up with it. A totally different system with other numbers would probably also make sense to us if we grew up with it. It's purely personal opinion. And if you think that Fahrenheit is still more a system for the common man than Celsius 'because very cold = 0 and very hot = 100 just makes intuitive sense', it doesn't really make sense that freezing = 32 right? For me it makes sense that 0 = freezing, because I grew up seeing that on the news and knowing that there would be snow/ice on the ground, meaning I needed to be more careful biking everywhere. That feels like a really clean round number to me. Do you see that it's just a matter of opinion? It's really just about what you like more. The one thing that Fahrenheit does kind of do better is that it's a smaller unit of measurement than celsius, which could be nice to know when you need to choose what to wear to match the temperature for example, but in my experience this isn't an issue for me as someone who only uses celsius. 2. The benefit of Celsius: There is really only one thing that differenciates Celsius from Fahrenheit and that is how much more scientifically relevant Celsius is. If I remember correctly you said that that wasn't relevant because Kelvin is used for scientific calculations anyways. Even though that's right, that doesn't change that (simplified) Kelvin is just a version of Celsius that has a lower starting point (To show you, these are some values of Kelvin(K) and Celsius(C) next to each other: K=0 = C=-273, K=273 = C=0, K=373 = C=100). This made Kelvin very easy for me to learn as a child, because it was just -273 of anything I knew already. Kelvin isn't as easy for someone who grows up with Fahrenheit. So logically someone who doesn't grow up with celsius probably makes more mistakes using Kelvin. Which means that you could argue that growing up with Fahrenheit is disadvantageous for these people if they want to enter the scientific field. Since this is the only thing that truely differenciates Celsius from Fahrenheit aside from personal preference, I hereby declare that Celcius is better than Fahrenheit! For me this is just a fun brain exercise. Please prove me wrong if you can, hope this was good food for thought!
I disagree that the metric system is superior in every type of measurement except temperature. There were two carpenters visiting from France talking about their brilliant technique to simplify their jobs by using a 1.2 meter stick instead of the standard 1 meter stick so they hardly ever had to deal with decimal points as 12 can be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 and itself. I said, "oh, like a foot?"
Pedantic nit picking here: The US has never used the "Imperial" system. The US Customary System is based on the PRE Imperial British system and thus the USCS is older than "Imperial" The difference is usually seen in VOLUME measures: Imperial pint is 20 Fluid ounces, USCS pint is 16 Fluid ounces for example. But overall, I use metric and USCS in most uses metric IS superior EXCEPT for weather reporting, Fahrenheit is a HUMAN scale: 0 degrees is to damn cold, 100 degrees is too damn hot. But hey, Give someone an inch and they'll take 1.61 kilometers. LOL
I like the more obvious thing where the point at which water turns into a dangerous slippery surface that you could contribute to a fall or sliding your car off the road being negative to be superior.
I grew up in the states but moved Eastern Europe in my mid teens and now live in the UK so I know both scales and can equally adjust to either. I have no preference as I’m familiar with both but the way I see it it’s slightly easier to think in Celsius since zero is freezing no matter what scale you look at and all you have to keep in mind is 0 to 30 number scale in practical daily use. Where’s with Fahrenheit that number scale triples.
This is one of my hot takes. I believe Metric is superior in every use except temperature. Fahrenheit has a wider range, but its not so wide to where its unusable for day-to-day use like Kelvin.
You're right! -- Fahrenheit is also more precise for the temperatures we commonly use because 1 deg C = 1.8 deg F. In the US we can choose, for example, 68F or 69F for the indoor winter heat temp. in our homes. If you must choose 20C or 21C, that's 68 or 69.8F, a spread of almost 2 deg F- which is less precise. To equal Fahrenheit precision Centigrade users should use half degrees- which is not commonly done- to describe common house or outside temperatures.
This was fun as a playful video, I hope people know not to take it too seriously. Here's my take on it: I think some of the "you already know how this works even if you don't use it" is cultural bias - as Americans, it's pretty intuitive, but if you didn't grow up with it, it probably isn't. People who live in Sweden or other cold countries might think 80F is hot, but for me, living in Los Angeles, that's great weather. Likewise, someone living in the tropics might feel really cold at 50F - I know for me, that's starting to get into the uncomfortable territory. By the time it hits freezing at 32F, I'm REALLY COLD, and 0F is way beyond just "too cold" for me (and I lived in the Midwest!). So, how would I design a temperature scale that everyone could use? Well, it'd be informed by my bias if I wanted to base it on comfort. Let's call it degrees X. If 0X was really cold for me, and 100X really hot, I might line that up more like between 30F and 110F. That way, with my scale, 50X is 70F, right in the middle for what I think of as a neutral "room temperature". The problem is, not everyone is going to agree with my bounds. So, maybe it would be best to base the scale on something objective that we all deal with, like, say, water! Water freezing and boiling are relevant to day to day life - many people live in climates where freezes happen, and that effects how you interact with the outside (maybe you have to scrape ice off of your car, which I do not miss!), and boiling water is important for cooking, which is pretty universal. Ultimately, I don't think either scale is "better", I think that you're usually just going to like what you grew up using. Celsius can be intuitive as well, I think of it in groups of 5. 40C is something I don't want to be outside in. I'm sure folks may disagree with these groupings too, though, just based on what they like or are used to.
Totally agree. I’m good at numbers and I could do the calculations but I can never recall the equation to multiply because I rarely need to. Being used to feet and inches is one thing but the simplicity of metric measurements is hard to argue against.
I'm from Brazil and I'm used to Celcius. If you tell me it's 25 degrees outside, I'll take a T-shirt and get ready to a comfortable afternoon in Summer Clothes. The feeling that I have in my mind when I read 25 ºC is the same feeling you, Americans have when you read 77 ºF. It's only a matter of using it and get used to it.
I'm from Alaska and I'm used to Farenheit. If you tell me it's 25 degrees outside, I'll take a T-shirt and get ready to a comfortable afternoon in summer clothes. The feeling that I have in my mind when I read 25 F is the same feeling you Brazilians have when you read 25 C because Alaska is just that much cooler. Disclaimer I'm not actually Alaskan. But they would feel that way.
I saw the title and I figure correctly what Kyle was going to say. I agree. I put everything in Celsius - my thermostats, phone apps, smart watch for about a year. I'm now quite comfortable with Celsius for everyday use. That is if you tell me it's 28 C outside, I don't have to convert to Fahrenheit to know that's a pleasant but just a little warm temperature. But, mostly due to conversing with other Americans using F, I switched everything to F. I like it better because as Kyle says 0 to 100, cold to hot for air temperature. Nice we can say over 100 to mean really hot and below 0 to say really cold.
You are making no sense. It's pretty important for common man to know when 0 degrees Celsius approaching because below it pipes burst, plants start dying and wiper washing liquid starts freezing, and rain turns into snow and road becomes icy and you need ice scraper and plane de-icer.
Celcius is better because it packs more meaning into every degree. If I know that tomorrow is going to be 19 rather than 23 I can plan for the day effectively. 23 is a lot warmer. If you grow up with it, you learn quickly to "feel" every degree. So there's even a big difference between 26, which is pleasantly warm, and 27, which nudges into hot. But Kyle doesn't know this because he didn't grow up with it, and like all of us, he is prejudiced in favor of what he knows.
I believe it's the exact opposite. Non-Americans are used to Celsius and are prejudiced in favor of what they know. I didn't grow up with metric, yet I still see it as superior overall.
Celsius is used in weather and aviation. To me they are the same. Just what you used to. I love that below zero in Celsius marks the freezing point of water.
I agree completely! As an American, I wish were used the metric system. However, Fahrenheit is better for the reasons stated and should be kept. the thing about temperatures compared to the other forms of measurement is that temperature is linear, we never have to convert temperatures within a scale unlike figuring out how many inches are in a mile or centimeters in a kilometer (of course that one is easy). A temperature just is and you only need to convert when jumping from one system to the other. Great explanation about these systems. Another thing about the freezing and boiling points; Those only work if you're at sea level. If you're up at altitude water boils at a lower temperature because there's less atmospheric pressure which also impacts when water boils. Anyone who lives in mountain areas already knows that cooking times are slightly longer because of this.
Agreed about no conversion within one system. However, usually you buy the themometer labelled with he scale -- If you have to do it, only needing pure water under certain conditions would still be easier to reproduce than saltwater under certsin conditions plus "the average body without fever".
The term "Freedom units" is actually ironic. We use the system we got from the very nation we went to war against to gain our freedom, WORSE the Metric system was invented by France, The nation that HELPED us gain said freedom. So in REALITY, Metric IS the "freedom units". Also Fahrenheit is neither English or French, We got Fahrenheit from the GERMANS.
The way I see it, the crux of the argument is largely, "Fahrenheit is what I'm familiar with, so it makes more sense to me" -- the same thing my high school students would say about Celsius. When you're in a place that often sees temperatures just above or just below freezing, Celsius is a HUGE advantage: -1, the road could be icy, +1 and you're probably fine. You don't have to be that familiar with the scale to know what it represents, you know that negative numbers mean slippery surfaces. But to the first point... if you grew up with Celsius -- which I didn't, as I grew up near Detroit on the Canadian side and we always watched American newscasts in Fahrenheit -- that's going to just seem more natural to you. A hot summer day is 30 and above; a cold winter night is -20 (or, if you're in Saskatoon, -40). So on those grounds it's a matter of taste -- but as someone who's fully converted to Celsius for everyday use, I can assure you that I'm at no disadvantage because, say, Fahrenheit is a finer-grained system (it's irrelevant most of the time). If you're trying to make an argument on "human experience" grounds... some people find 40 F unbearably cold, and some (like me) find 90 F unbearably hot. Humans have a wide range of experiences and sentiments, but basing a temperature scale on the cold sterility and unwavering (mostly) properties of water, that's just good sense. In conclusion, the imperial system is just stupid and it all needs to go. Those NASA scientists that forgot to convert one thing from imperial to metric and lost a multi-hundred-million-dollar Mars mission... none of that would've happened if the US had the guts to fully commit to metric in the '70s like they promised they would. Plus, basing the length of something on the king's actual foot? Madness. And finally... because the US is so close to us, and so dominant, they are effectively preventing Canada from becoming as metric as we should be. I know my height in feet and inches better than in centimetres, and that's just not right.
I live in Minnesota which frequently gets below freezing and usually stays below freezing most of the winter. Its not hard to remember 32 F. It really isnt.
Roads don't usually get icy at 32°, because most places with real winters will dump salt and brine on the roads. Salt becomes ineffective at--you guessed it--Zero degrees Fahrenheit.
@michaelwald6671 Also roads arent gonna freeze right away lol Its not like it drops from 33 to 32 and all of a sudden, a puddle of water is a sheet of ice. It also wont make a perfectly dry surface become icy.
Not to be contrarian because I love your channel, Kyle. But, this is just my personal experience: As a 60-year-old American, I have found myself using Celsius a lot lately because I have been traveling overseas more and watching more UA-cam videos by non-Americans. As a result, I am getting more accustomed to Celsius and I agree with other commenters who use both systems that the supposed human comfort scale really doesn’t matter that much in what system is used. It’s just what you're familiar with. Anyway, my physical Fahrenheit comfort range is about 30 to 90 and not 0 to 100. There is no magical difference between 100 and 101. The only thing I’ve noticed is that my nostrils tend to freeze at around 0 and driving on paved roads starts to get scary at 32. So, for me, I think of the Celsius comfort range as about -10 to 35, and the roads get scary at 0. Not really all that difficult. Maybe, we should just all use Kelvin and forget about these other systems.
Fahrenheit is a bit more so, but both Celsius and Fahrenheit are fairly arbitrary. Whether you think one is better than the other basically comes down to what you're used to. I personally prefer Celsius, mostly because it's easier to remember 0 and 100C than 32 and 212F.
This thought crossed my mind last night when I was driving, that because of the obvious larger variance between numbers in F, that it is an indication of a more precise temperature feel, lol…but C gets love because freezing is a nice round 0 And now Kyle has a video about this random thought, love it.
I love the fahrenheit scale, it's the primary unit of measure that I firmly believe is superior in Imperial than Metric. All because humans can easily relate. 0=very cold, 100=very hot. 78, perfect
And 50 makes sense being the middle, because it’s an awkward temp that can feel cold or warm depending on weather conditions and what season you’re in.
Kelvin describes how atoms feel. Celsius describes how water feels. Fahrenheit describes how humans feel.
Actually, Fahrenheit describes how saltwater and a horse feel.
@@jeremycraft8452 actually no
I can feel the difference between 32F and -32F. Humans in the equatorial regions will never feel 0F but they will feel over 100F. Also, the humidity is a large component of how humans feel temperature as well. Heat indices are more accurate as to how humans sense temperature. But some people can’t stand cold temperatures that others can and vice versa with heat. Temperature is a scientific parameter and must be repeatable and standardized, not based on comfort level of disparate humans.
@@hearmeout9138huh
@@hearmeout9138 For most temperate regions, 0 F is about as cold as it gets, and 100 F about as warm as it gets. F is the way to go when reporting temperature or in casual discussion. The way it feels is in the numbers. No interpretation needed.
For graphing changes in the earth's climate I'd rather Kelvin be used as that would more accurately reflect the magnitude of the change.
Mnemonic device for C to F conversion.
0 is freezing, 10 is not, 20 is pleasing, 30 is hot
This is great!
I learned "30's hot, 20's nice, 10 is cold, 0's ice"
Ah, so that's why C is a useless system, thank you for making it so easy to understand why, you forgot to say anything about conversion tho,
3:46 explains why Fahrenheit is much better
@@abgeordnete That's a good one
@@xp7575 My mom taught me that 28 years ago to help answer a possible question on some standardized test in high school (SATs? can't remember). And it worked! There was a question which that poem helped me answer correctly! But yes Fahrenheit is much better as explained in my other comment
In fahrenheit: at 0 you're really cold, at 100 you're really hot.
In Celcius: at 0 you're cold, at 100 you're dead.
in Kelvin: at 0 you're dead, at 100 you're dead.
Very nice
300 kelvin is perfect temp for humans
@@DanielGMedleyI prefer 298.15 K
In Kelvin: at 0 you are dead, also quantum effects
0 at C is freezing. that's more than just "cold" to me
Good news when it’s -40 degrees both Fahrenheit and Celsius are the same😂
Happens once in a while where I'm from
😂welcome to Canada. All are equal, even temp measurement units😂
Back in college in New Hampshire we could still have this debate, cuz classes were still in session either way
I had a friend who used to live in Ft. McHenry in Canada. It would get this temp in the winter.
How is - 40 good news? It can easily kill you. I guess if you love danger that's good. To each his own.
Fahrenheit is perfect for weather because you know 100 is too damn hot, 0 is too damn cold, and 69 is nice.
0°F isn't that cold.
@@chrisjohnson7929 How long have you been able to stay alive outside in zero F without a coat of some kind 🤔
@@wendylcs4283 Longer than you would think. But if you are going to be outside for any period of time, you should be wearing a coat of some kind at 0°C let alone 0°F.
@@chrisjohnson7929Tommy tough knuckles over here
It’s literally negative 50 degrees Fahrenheit outside rn
Fahrenheit is for people, Celsius is for water. As a people i approve of this message.
It's for water until you change your altitude. Then the scale is thrown off a bit.
@@jds1275 it’s thrown off an astonishing amount. Even having taken college level chemistry and thermodynamics, I still had it set in my head that water boils at 212, period. Turns out where I live, it boils 15 degrees (F) lower than that. At the highest elevation I’ve boiled water for coffee, it’s a full 26 degrees difference. That’s 1/7th of the usual range between freezing and boiling!
As seventy percent water, I approve of Celsius.
@ are you cold blooded? No? Then Fahrenheit’s still better…
People are 60% water.
So, Fahrenheit is only for the 40% of the other stuff that makes up a body/person.
Of course Mr. Fahrenheit meant for 100 to be the average human body temperature but was a bit off due to a rounding error.
Personally, I don't think that part matters about the body's core temperature because it can vary in humans by a few degrees Fahrenheit. I think however, it just works better from a standpoint of knowing when your feverish 100, is close to the upper limit of what humans can handle.
Actually... [insert ackchyually meme here]
Fahrenheit intended for normal human body temp to be 90... and then 96. Fahrenheit based his model on an older model (Romer Scale) that has brine freeze at 0, water freeze at 7.5 and body temp at 22.5. Fahrenheit started by multiplying that scale by 4 to give more fine-grain detail and eliminate fractions. This put temps at those three temps at 0/30/90.
Then he tweaked the scale up slightly to make it 0/32/96. This was done so that there was 64 degrees between freezing and human body temp. Why was this important? Because now you can easily mark degrees on your thermometer. Freeze water and mark your thermometer. Check your body temp and mark your thermometer. Now you have 32 and 96 recorded.
Now mark the exact middle between those two marks. Now mark the exact middle between the three marks. Now mark the exact middle between those 5 marks... do this three more times and you've now got exact 1-degree Fahrenheit marks on your thermometer.
And zero in Fahrenheit is when saltwater freezes. So, there is a reason for the range.
@@gregm766 Saltwater freezes at approximately 28.4 degrees Fahrenheit.
@@mournblade1066 I stand corrected. I was given faulty infromation.
I never thought about the fact that 0°F to 100°F describes the livable range for mankind. Great point!
Up until now, Celsius made more sense to me, being based on water freezing & boiling, a physical case.
0F bone chilling
10F frigid
20F freezing
30F cold
40F chilly
50F cool
60F mild
70F warm
80F hot
90F very hot
100F extremely hot
110F Arizona
Memorize 11 different ranges? Seems difficult
@@chefnyc at least it's in 10s
@@chefnycVery easy
This is amazing! I've never considered this. I think the value of this video is not in its debate about F vs C but in the illumination of how arbitrary both scales are! Thanks for the perspective Kyle.
We nerds should all start using Kelvin in everyday talk. "Wow, should be over 300 this weekend. Lets plan a beach day!" "Hey guys, the temps haven't been over 270 in over a month! The ice has to be good to go. Lets get a hockey game together soon."
Where my Dvorak users at? Ya'll down to convert to K?
Metric is better than imperial for doing calculations and conversions, but if you're doing manual work there can be benefits to using using like feet and inches with divisions of 12 because it divides evenly more ways than 10 does. (1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 versus 1, 2, 5, and 10.) It's the same reason that our time system is not based on 10s. You can use more simple numbers without using decimals.
Yeah it’s no accident, they chose 12 inches to the foot. It’s an easy thing to divide in half and thirds and in quarters. Doing that for 10 is not pretty especially not thirds.
Exactly! Same with 5280 feet in 1 mile. I think it was chosen that way because 5280 has so many different divisors, that the mile could easily be subdivided into halves, thirds, quarters, fifths, sixths, etc.
I do wish the imperial length system went one more unit down because an inch is way too large of a unit, and the fractional inches are just messy.
Except when using tools like sockets - Metric has no in between sizes. If 10mm is too small, try 11mm. In inches, how finely are you dividing the fraction? 1/8 or 7/16 or 5/32? I have on occasion had to go purchase an additional socket as it was in /32 instead of /16 or /8.
If you are doing sloppy Manual work sure count in feet, considering a human foot can vary from about 20 to more than 50cms in sizes good luck with that.
When Fahrenheit found his scale he based it on the temperature at which seawater froze. That became zero degrees. He set a mark for the freezing of fresh water, which he found at 32.
To set the temperature of the 'opposite' of freezing: boiling. On a circle, opposites are 180 degrees apart. 32 degrees (freezing) and 212 degrees (boiling) put his scale in that 'human experience' zone which you describe. As another comments here, it is the scale that humans feel/experience.
How did I miss this when it came out two weeks ago? This is *great* !
IIRC, Fahrenheit himself (A GERMAN, not British OR American!) wanted 100 degrees to be the normal human temperature, since it's 98.6 F- He was damn close. Fahrenheit is the HUMAN relatable scale. Also, I remember when Celsius was called Centigrade and Kilohertz was called kilocycles. Then one day they changed, and no one told me. Yes, I'm old. LOL.
He was Dutch, but close enough.
its not human relatable, its like caveman relatable. cooking revolves around boiling water, so actually on a practical level for everything EXCEPT WEATHER, celsius works better. and celsius isnt even bad for weather, because 0 celsius is a good point for snow.
@@buglepongahhh...what a beautiful day...what would you say? Is it more like 25.6 or 26.2?
@@AndyDrake-FOOKYT in the sun or shade? windy, humid, cloudy or raining?
This is why they say if your temperature is 100 or greater, you have a fever. There actually is some variation though slight with humans with their core temperature. So it technically is still a human scale from that standpoint.
Personally, I kind of always wish we had had some sort of hybrid. Between Celsius and Fahrenheit. I prefer everything above freezing with Fahrenheit. But I do like that 0°c when it comes to freezing. Although it is interesting I think 0° f. Is the same as what a freezer should be. It would just be nice if they hit some kind of rounded numbers.
For cooking, have to say celsius is by far the superior measure. Water being the main component of most foods, the scale between freezing and boiling is ideal.
I came here thinking oh cmon don't be so proud and I left convinced you're right. I never considered the 0-100 range and it makes complete sense.
I love that you have the Gizz album in the backround G-King.
I agree that the metric system for certain mathematical applications is better than the imperical system. Especially in Geotechnical Engineering. It was far easier to calculate soil densities, sive analysis, water content, etc. But any other applications I prefer using imperical.
I find it easy to take a "ladder" method to manage C vs F. By that I mean memorizing a handful of pairs: 0C = 32F, 10C = 50F, 20C = 68F, 30C = 86F, 40C = 104F. When I see a temperature I can see which "rungs of the ladder" it falls between. Noticing that each increment of 10C = 18F led me to this method also.
I tell my Canadian relatives this exact idea all the time. They are reluctant converts to the metric system as is, still preferring to use imperial measurements for things like height, weight and short distances. But they have completely bought in on the centigrade scale for temps. They spend half the year living in below zero temperatures because of this now.
I completely agree that metric is superior, with the one exception being Fahrenheit, which I actually love! I swear you are just like me. Just one correction. We use the US Customary System, not the Imperial System. It always bugged me when people called the US Customary system "Imperial." Great video!
Thank you for the clarification
Makes total sense. Fahrenheit all the way.
As an european, I prefer miles over km, but centimeters over inches.
Right there with you on the miles thing. I KNOW what a mile is. Whenever a distance is given in kilometers I have to try and remember what % of a mile a kilometer is. But I also prefer inches (based on human dimensions--your thumb knuckle), yards (based on the distance from his nose to his fingertip of some old king) to meters, and gallons to liters. As the song goes, I'm old-fashioned.
I think the bands of 10 works very well. 40s cold, 50s cool, 60s mild, 70s warm, 80 hot, for example. Numbers between give granularity.
Celsius is easier. Below 0 is ice cold. Single digits are cold. Teens are fair. 20s are warm. 30s are very warm. 40s are hot. Above 50 is lethal.
@jag92949 Celsius is a waste. Its never 100 C outside anywhere but in many places it can get to 100 F.
Celsius also overuses the minus sign. When I think negative temperatures, it should be Arctic levels of cold, not just barely cold for snow
@ I think 20°F is pretty negative.
@jag92949 20 F is not that cold lol Thats a pleasant winter day where I live
@ No, it’s negative to the 6th degree
I'm sure if you grew up with Celcius, 35 sounds hot, but to me, who has lived in the Southern US, that number is just not big enough to describe how #$!% hot it gets in July and August. 95 does the job much better. Of course you also need the humidity percentage to describe the full amount of miserableness. I agree the rest of the metric system is better. I expect we will continue to slowly adopt the metric system, but keep imperial for some things, like they do in the UK.
I drive a German car, and I feel Celsius is better for understanding the temp gauge in the car. You know right away 100 in boiling, so any temp over 100 your relying on the cooling system to hold more pressure as the water in the system is wanting to undergo a phase change. With proper coolant the boiling point can be raised, which is why the temp gauge red line is at 110-120. But even if you put straight water in your car you can understand pretty easily that 100+ is pushing your luck.
modern cars usually don't have overheating issues unless they have a coolant leak. I haven't had an overheating issues since my 1984 Grand Prix.
@@JimmyMon666 Pretty sure the laws of physics have not changed in the last 40 years. You haven't experienced the an over heating issue because of better, younger parts, not that water started boiling at a different temperature. Water below boiling is still putting less pressure on cooling system components. a side note. As a mechanic, I wouldn't trust modern car cooling system components to last 40 years. most are plastic and they crack at some point. Plastic hates being heat cycled. Replacing all hoses and plastic components is pretty common on "modern cars" when they hit 10 years old. This wasn't a thing back in the 90s when everything was made of aluminum.
The delineations between degrees is smaller in Fahrenheit, yielding greater accuracy of temperature. Of course we can always add decimals, but... Celsius is like a gauge or tape rule, where the accuracy of the device is limited to the interval of marks. Delta 1 degree in F is a smaller change than Delta 1 degree in C.
As an American engineer, this got me quite frustrated. Your tagline of “science uses Kelvin” is a major oversimplification. A change of 1 degC is the exact same as a change of 1 degK. Most calculations I’ve done involving temperature are done to calculate changes in temperature rather than absolute temperature. In these scenarios, science uses Celsius and Kelvin interchangeably. In fact, since the majority of heat exchangers, insulation, radiators, etc. are used on Earth rather than space, change in DegC is the most common. And the interdependence of units in Metric connecting volume, energy, and temperature make DegC the absolute best unit for connecting people to the physical world around us.
Completely agree with this. The interdependence of the metric system makes it far superior to any purposed conveniences of Fahrenheit.
It’s a measurement of kinetic energy present in matter. It should never be negative. Both Celsius and Fahrenheit arbitrarily chose the freezing point of water as the reference point for their scale but the universe isn’t exclusively made up of water. Kelvin is the only rational temperature scale.
Here’s the best way I’ve found to interpret Celsius weather forecasts: “30 is hot, 20 is nice, 10 is cold, 0 is ice.”
Wow, that's really helpful for me. thanks.
Me, from Las Vegas, 30 is nice to me. Anything up to 43 is tolerable, but at 44 you get to super hot territory.
👍🏼 Got give a shout out for the foot. In a mixed marriage (American/Imperial + French/Metric), I'm very familiar with and can use both freely. Of course I'm biased being American! But the foot is so human-scale. Having nothing (that's really used) between the centimeter and the meter just feels awkward. Perhaps that's why dozens of countries who have switched to metric still use feet to measure things, such as height and depth. Also, English is a syllable-efficient language. We like short words, which puts some metric terms at an inheritant disadvantage. 10 lbs sounds nicer than 5 kg. 6 miles sounds better than 10 kilometers.
Fahrenheit is also a finer scale. You can say 71F, but you would never say 21.67 C. You would have to say 21C or 22C, which would be actually closer to 70F and 72F. But really it is 71F you are trying to describe.
To be fair, they probably would say 22.7 C. Which is still dumb, who wants decimals in their temps?
Exactly
@@stevemarvin I've never heard anybody in the UK use decimals when referring to the outside temperature.
@@desertodavid You may be right. I swear I saw it on either UK or German TV years ago but it could be a false memory. If so I stand corrected.
@stevemarvin will it depends on how precise you want to be. It's possible you heard it on TV say if it was from a weather station maybe I don't know... I'm just saying that in normal conversation people are not that precise.
If you have a work crew (agriculture, construction, road work, etc) then it is reasonable to expect workers to be able to perform their jobs between 0 and 100 F (with precautions; proper clothing in cold, plenty of water breaks in the heat), but it is not reasonable to expect outdoor work when the temp is below 0 f and above 100 f. People can die of frostbite and heatstroke, respectively, even with proper precautions outside that range. Yes, you might live in Alaska or Saudi Arabia where the weather frequently goes beyond that range, but 95% of humanity may never go beyond either extreme.
It is important that 0c is the freezing temperature of water, because water falls from the sky like a lot. It gets cold a lot where I live and it’s good to be able to tell at a glance if it’s going to be wet or icy.
It's a bit of a misnomer to say Celsius is not used in science, I use it several times per day at work. Granted I work in water chemistry. I do find it useful to know how close my baths are to phase change transitions. That being said I have an excellent understanding of how hot water is at 60 C. You tell me it 32 C outside and I'm completely confused.
Celsius also appears in the definition of the gram, which is the basic metric unit of mass.
I was going to say this too. I studied chemistry in college and worked in photolithography research and we used Celsius.
@@jessimatic Me, too. College chemistry, physics and thermodynamics. Loaded with metrics and Celsius.
Definition of specific heat capacity
And the increments are identical in Kelvin and °C, only the offset differs by 273. So, if you need a temperature difference it's the same, no matter which scale.
Thanks Geo Guy. I'm in a scientific field professionally with an advanced science degree. I understand the use of K and C in engineering, science (in general), and architecture. And I agree metrics are more accurate and useful even in daily usage (although I still prefer knowing the imperial lengths and so on; it's very simple to get an approximation of KM to mile so no big deal for me. Just personal preference.
But now you've given me a good defense against my Celsius snob friends that stands up in practical terms. I'd never try to use F in a laboratory but....heck as far as "How's the weather today?" I surely can proudly say it's going to get up to 80F and not feel like I need to defend myself!
As a Canadian who was growing up with the 1975 switch to Celsius, I know both equally as well, both intuitively and mathematically.
0F is bloody cold for Sarnia on the 43rd. and 100F is way too hot.
Americans complain about the cold that comes from Canada.
Well as a Canadian I want to complain about last summers heat home from the U.S. with many +40C days.
Keep your heat way and we'll try to keep the cold away...which usually is coming from Siberia anyhow!
Canadian here. I was born in 1953 and we switched to metric in 1977 (when I was 24) so I’m fluent in Fahrenheit and Celsius. As a practical matter they’re pretty much the same. If you say the temperature is going to be 70F (in the U.S.) or 20C anywhere else, everyone knows you don’t need a coat.
With F we have the ease of saying "it'll be in the 70s". "In the 20s" in celcius is a range too broad to be meaningful
Is your vehicle fuel efficiency measured in mileage, or kilometerage?
@@chuckinhouston9952 Instead of miles per gallon, they use how many liters per 100km's. No easy to make a quick conversion.
I used F only my entire life (I'm 60) but in the last couple of years I started to embrace becoming Celsius 'fluent,' because I have a buddy in another country whom I chat with regularly. And we're always talking about the weather in our respective locations so I've made the habit of communicating it in C, so now I'm getting pretty comfortable with it.
And as for all other metric measurements being superior, absolutely. I never could multiply fractions (etc) as a kid or adult and metric has been saving my butt for years in that regard lol. When old codgers complain about metric being "too complicated," I explain that our systems, if applied to money, a dollar would be 132 cents (as in ounces per gallon) and then some will see the light!
@@ReverendMeat51I’m fine with temps between 68°F and 85°F. There’s always a margin of error when predicting temperature.
I've been saying the same thing for years! I agree that metric is better in every way except temperature. We can go ahead and get rid of feet and miles, but they'll never take Fahrenheit from me.
The only reason we prefer Fahrenheit in this country is that we're used to it. Celsius is fine, but it's not something we grew up with. In Europe, it's the opposite. We know that 100°F is very hot; in Europe, they know that 40°C is very hot. Six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Fahrenheit is much more useful in setting a thermostat.
@@jerrymeadows5059 yes because youre used to it. For me who has grown up with celsius its easier with celsius
Celsius and Fahrenheit both have their advantages. I grew up with Celsius but have a working understanding of Fahrenheit due to some time spent in the USA.
In my opinion the Fahrenheit vs Celsius debate is just needless polemic ....
Mmetric vs imperial would be a much better topic. Not because imperial is bad, it isn't! But metric is much more pragmatic. It saves so much time and worries when you have to convert or scale.
you think he doesn't know that?
40C is not very hot where I live- Las Vegas. Which tells you those numbers are useless without the humidity qualifier.
As an engineering student, if I'm given a problem where temperature is a factor, Celsius is a lot easier to work with and what I'll always prefer. If I need to know what to wear, I'm using Fahrenheit because it makes intuitive sense, the 0 to 100 portion tells me how comfortable it is, anything above or below that tells me how much faster I'm gonna die outside.
0°C being the temperature that water freezes at is the best feature of the Celsius scale. As someone who lives in an area that yo-yos above and below that line, I can tell you that transitioning from above to below 0°C is the most drastic shift in conditions. So much so, that it deserves to be the point that every other temperature is measured as above or below it. This is the temperature where rain falls instead as snow, and where wet roads turn into sheets of ice. Seeing the forecast of rain during the day, then falling to a low of -2°, instantly prepares me for what to expect having crossed that threshold.
I live in an area where the temp plunge well below 0°F and in summer will reach the low 100's.
Zero Celsius (32°F) is a largely meaningless number. It's just a warm January day. Nothing really important happens, except that you might need to scrape your windows.
Even the roads don't get icy at that point, because the we start dumping salt.
Zero *Fahrenheit*, however, is very significant. It's when temps get dangerously cold, and--importantly--when roads actually get dangerously icy because salt brine becomes ineffective.
I mean sure but you can also just take the same philosophy for 32 degrees Fahrenheit
@@michaelwald6671"we start dumping salt" is the meaning.
Despite that, it probably depends on how much downpour (soaking into the remaing snow, covering grid or washing away the salt) and how much yo-yo you have in the region.
@@michaelwald6671 sidewalks in cities do get icy and slippery already at -1°C (at least where i live they do) ...
and having to scrape your windows in the morning or not might make quite the difference in when you have to leave the house i imagine
@@michaelwald6671 I find ice, at just below freezing, to be far more treacherous than ice at minus 39.
Fahrenheit also benefits because it has a smaller unit of measurement. You can make finer adjustments to temperature without having to break out the decimals, and people that are very specific about the temperature while they’re sleeping will tell you that’s VERY important
Can you explain then why you use miles instead of kilometers, gallons instead of liters, inches instead of centimeters etc.?
It's all arbitrary. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
In general, I'm sympathetic to your point, and people get too worked up about their units of measure. Almost all of them are arbitrary, and the only relative advantage is convenience. Being American, I'm inclined to agree that the Fahrenheit scale is more intuitive, and better fits the climates where the overwhelming majority of humans live. But the one advantage of Celsius that you asked for is that a temperature change of one degree Celsius is the same as as a temperature change of one degree Kelvin. That means Celcius temperatures can be plugged directly into many scientific formulas based on the SI units you conceded are better for most purposes. As long as the formula uses a change in temperature instead of absolute temperature, degrees C is fine. I daresay that most temperature calculations used outside theoretical physics deal with temperature changes rather than absolute temperatures.
I agree, metric is best. As for the “sciences” or “hard science” using Kelvin vs C that’s a pretty narrow niche. I work in the medical industry and everything we do is in C. I switched to C a few years ago and got used to it pretty quickly. I pretty much think in C now.
Most human beings only care about temperature in term of "weather." Specifically, at what temperature, humans start to feel cold enough to catch a "cold". Zero degrees Celsius is the perfect barometer for that. The next most important use of temperature for the average person is for boiling and cooking food. In which case, the boiling point of water is essential. 100 degrees Celsius is perfect for that. Fahrenheit is not user-friendly by comparison.
I think the biggest flaw with Celsius is the degree size. Fahrenheit degrees are much smaller so things can be fine tuned more precisely. Celsius needs to be replaced with a “duocentigrade” with 200 degrees between the freezing and boiling point of water. That would make it even finer than the 180 degrees for Fahrenheit. It would be easy to get because it is just Celsius x2. And it would be easier for people to convert between it and Fahrenheit.
To convert from Fahrenheit to duocentrigrade: 1. Subtract 32 degrees to adjust the freezing point. 2. Using the 9x table, find the closest number on the table and add that to the result of step 1. For example, 75 Fahrenheit to Celsius 75-32=43. The closest number to 43 on the 9x table is 45 (which is 9x5) so add 5 to 43 to get 48. If you divide duocentigrade by two to get Celsius 48/2=24. Which is very close to the 23.889 you would get using an online converter.
To convert duocentigrade into Fahrenheit: 1. Round to the nearest 10. 2. Subtract one for each 10. 3. Add 32. For example 75 duocentigrade (which would be 37.5 Celsius) rounds up to 80, so subtract 8 from 75 which equals 68. Add 32 to get 100. If you use an online converter you see that 37.5 Celsius is 99.5 Fahrenheit. Again off by less than a single degree and easy to do in one’s head.
You know how often I measure the temperature of water when I bring it to a boil?
Never. When it's bubbling vigorously, it's boiling.
People think inch fractions are inferior to mm but then use decimal Celsius temperatures.
Naa. People think writing inch fractions as vulgar fractions mostly nonesensical. Decimal fractions are fine.
E.g. 0.125 inch = 125 minch would be magnificent.
Decimal numbers are not fractions.
@ “Decimal” is short for “decimal fraction”.
As an american living in Europe, I rely on that trivia fact I learned years ago that body temp is 37°C, and kinda go from there on vibes, of course with the 0° and 100° in my mind as hardcores.
Kyle's hypothesis has been tested. Canada switched to Celsius in 1975. Within a few years Fahrenheit had disappeared from weather reports. It's still common in cooking, though -- pretty much universal. Preserving older recipes and using recipes from American publications has encouraged that, as did the continued use of Fahrenheit stoves. So my conclusion is -- Celsius won't kill ya. Keep using Fahrenheit if you want.
I will.
I'm a little late, but the Imperial length/distance scale is pretty nice if you know how to use fractions and don't want to keep pulling out a calculator while you're working.
“°C converted to °F, Double it and add 30”
-McKenzie brothers
😂
We genuises think alike.
@ McKenzie brothers were old school but they had funny skits😄
Both scales are pretty easy. For weather Celcius is more centered on the freezing mark 0°C/ 32°F while Fahrenheit is centered on a mild temperature of 50°F/10°C. The way I always looked at it:
Cool temperature is single digits Celsius above freezing 1°C - 9°C or below 50°F.
Cold is negative single digits Celsius at or below freezing 0°C/ 32°F.
Very cold is negative double digits Celsius -10°C/14°F and below.
Mild or warm is double digits Celsius at least 10°C/50°F and over.
I disagree! Celsius is great, you get to work around the zero and the 100 which is practical. I wouldn’t say water freezing and boiling are only scientific things, they serve a purpose in your everyday life too.
Temperature below zero means that the car should have winter tires, the kids should have padded clothes, main water connectors that aren’t in use during winter should be turned off etc.
Temperature above 100 means that bacteria dies, the oil temperature in your car is ok, your sauna is too hot etc.
I'm not getting why sauna temperature would be practical for general use. I, and the vast majority of people on Earth, have never been in a sauna.
I think it mainly comes down to what you're used to growing up. Like the Fahrenheit scale feels alien to me as I grew up and am used to Celsius when talking about temperature. It's probably the same for Americans looking at Celsius when they've been in contact with only Fahrenheit (except science classes) in their life. What I think is good about using Celsius in your daily life is that 0 indicates that surfaces might freeze over so you need to be careful when going outside, driving, riding your bike etc. Another thing is that Celsius uses the same scale as Kelvin, just with a 273.15 difference, meaning that conversion is much easier than from F to K
i think the fahrenheit scale was developed on the basis that one degree was the minimum discernable temp differnce experienced by a human.
I heard it was developed on the basis that 0ºF was the temperature where meat and other perishable food could be safely stored long term, and 100ºF was the best estimate at the time of normal human body temperature.
I believe it's just what you're accustomed to. If you grew up in the USA, you're more likely to understand the F° range vs C°. Likewise, the reverse is true if you grew up in other parts of the world. However, there is a larger increase in intensity between a 1°C vs 1°F increase in temperature.
It's entirely up to what you're used to. To me and I'm sure 90% of other Celsius users would agree, that Celsius feels intuitive.
18 degrees sounds normal. 35 degrees sounds unbearably hot. And 6 degrees sounds very cold.
The same way you say that we "already know it" because 0-100 farenhieght roughly describes a normal range of temperatures. I would suggest that Americas "already know Celsius" it's the same thing but (climate dependent) the normal range of temperatures is 0-40.
It's no less intuitive than farenhieght. The only advantage I suppose is that you can be more granular since the range of normal temperatures is wider you can be more specific, which is helpful in getting a more accurate idea of the temperature when humidity, sun and wind have such a strong effect on how a given temperature actually feels.
You didn't even touch on the fact that degrees in F are smaller, which is better, because they can represent the temperature more precisely.
To your point, I figured out that a better way for me to anchor C to F than 0C = 32F is 10C = 50F. That's a much more useful conversion because it's based on what's a normal temperature, the whole basis of the F scale, as you said!
That’s useless though. Studies have shown that humans can’t detect temperature changes much smaller than 1°C. And Celsius has decimals anyway.
Finally someone has stated this.
You thought this was a good argument?
It is easy to convert Celsius to kelvin, just add absolute temperature that is 273.15. Celsius is highly logical, Zero means freezing, 18 to 25 is pleasant, 30+ is hot 35+ very hot, 40+is heat wave. For. Those living in a tropical region, Celsius is the best. Fahrenheit has many range, that human doesnot need. We just need, is it freezing , boiling, at what pressure (cooking). Sorry, I will take Celsius
Sigh. This old saw.
"50 being right in the middle is not going to be either hot nor cold, it's going to be pretty mild." This is not true for anyone brought up in a temperate climate. 70°F is comfortable for a normal person. 50°F would be at least sweater weather for the average person. 75°F would be still be comfortable, not warm, to most people. 100°F would be heat warnings in most places. 0°F would be "you will die without proper equipment" in most places. 32°F is the freezing point of water and very, not kinda, cold.
If you want a glimpse into madness, go lookup the actual reasons for the specific 0°F and, well, other measurements of the Fahrenheit scale (there is no specific reason for its 100°F as far as I could find). It's completely arbitrary lunacy that doesn't seem to even have a consistent explanation, other than being consistently bizarre.
I live in the US and use Fahrenheit regularly but I don't go around trying to justify it.
The justifying comes from the Celsius defenders. Commonality does not equal superiority.
@@GeographyKing You literally just made a video justifying the Fahrenheit scale. I'm not making this a "my system's better than your system" debate. I didn't defend any particular scale in my comment. Use whatever system you want. But, the Fahrenheit scale is absolutely not a scale for humans. Like I said, I mostly use the Fahrenheit scale but I don't defend it because it's not any better than any other scale and there are clear drawbacks.
And, seriously, read the wiki page on how the Fahrenheit scale was calibrated. I defy you to claim it's a rational system after reading its history. Its multiple choice history.
5:45 Celsius is a Kelvin scale tared/rooted on ice point. That's it. They are the same! What's getting hotter by 5 degrees K is getting hotter by 5 degrees C. Relatively, C and K are always 273.15 degrees apart. So, when working with differences, there's no need to convert C to K at all.
Practically, "zero" is a signal to switch to winter clothes and tires. It gets icy. And we too are made of water.
This is an interesting surprise. The geography of temperature!
"Don't wanna be no Canadian Idiot... don't wanna measure degrees in Celsius... but at least they do have Celine Dión." ~ "Weird" Al Yankovic 😊
Medicine uses Celsius. I got used to it at work.
Well Kyle as a 73 yr. old Canadian I am obviously very familiar with Celsius and Fahrenheit ( and Kelvin for that matter ) since we used the Imperial System until the mid 70's . But even in grade school in the 1950's I understood the Metric System since it was so basic even though I could not relate it to real life uses .
Your point about Fahrenheit is interesting and the fact that each "degree" is less of an actual increase in heat makes it more accurate in whole degrees
One thing that always puzzled me is " why 32 and 212 ? Why not 25 & 200 , or 50 & 250 ? Or if you contend that boiling point is not relatable then make freezing 100 degrees or better still make freezing " 0 " and so called room temperature " 100 " .
Sorry Kyle but using the 'common man' usage is a pretty flimsy argument for me!
If you've grown up in Europe the you just know if it's 35C then it's going to be a sweltering day and likewise if they say it's going to be 5C then you know to crank up the heating and put a sweater on under your cost when you go out.
The reason given in effect is only that Fahrenheit is better for US citizens because they're familiar with it. In short: continue using what you're accustomed to (which is fine of course).
Neither valid pros nor cons given.
I think what Kyle is saying is that it’s designed for common man. I know people are used to it but people can get used to almost anything. 0-100 makes more sense from a design perspective. 0 - 40 does not.
@@jeffwatson7315 Not only a 0 to 100 scale more intuitive than a 0 to 40 scale, the 0 to 40 scale also doesn't cover the habitable environment as well; at 0 degree Celsius you don't even see snow.
@@chumanho yeah. but you see snow right below 0 C, which makes more sense than saying "it;s below 32 F, there might be ice on the road". 32 it's just arbitrary
@@kostasjezuz4846 That's not a problem at all.
below 0C you know it's below freezing
below 32F you know it's below freezing
Either way it doesn't make it easier/harder to tell when it's freezing.
For us in Canada, if precipitation is coming and it's -1 it's going to snow, if it's +1 it's going to rain. Very handy. Everything you described seems to be what you're used to. I know if it's +35 degrees it's going to be bloody hot because that's what I grew up with. If it's -35 it's very cold. Each degree difference means more I guess.
Celsius is better because it clearly says below zero is freezing. Easy for drivers. Otherwise it is where you were grown
Not being a native of the USA this video helped clarify things a great deal. Way to go! Thanks 🙏
THanKS for the great and detailed description of Fahrenheit. I've always liked it better than celsius because C requires using decimal points more often.
Good one, as always, Kyle.
You're explaining very well what I've tried to tell people. Once I was traveling through Canada and I saw a national TV weather forecast while I was there. The high temps on the map ranged from 19 in Whitehorse and Yellowknife to 23 in Toronto and Montreal. Not much variance on the scale! Also, you can dial in the temperature you want in modern cars. If you choose the Fahrenheit scale, it goes up one number at a time: 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73. If you choose the Celsius scale, the jumps are too big from one number to the next, so it goes up half a degree at a time: 18.5. 19.0, 19.5, 20.0, 20.5. After those two experiences, I came to the conclusion that Fahrenheit is better for everyday usage.
I agree that the Fahrenheit scale is better suited to common human experience - whether one feels hot or cold, and in fields such as cooking. One thing about reporting weather in Fahrenheit is that there's simply more resolution, typically a factor of 2x. Of course one can use decimals but that is somehow less intuitive than simple counting numbers. I'll always think of temps in the human experience range in terms of degrees F. Below that it's better to use Kelvin, as when discussing cryogenic liquids and solids. Above the boiling point of water, I prefer to think in degrees C rather than degrees F although I know that K is the proper unit.
I'm gonna be the european in the room and try to disprove your point, so here goes:
1. 'Fahrenheit is better for the common man'. I think that's totally based on personal opinion. People who use Celsius generally know that 0 is (literally) freezing. 10 is coldish. 20 is cool. 30 is hot and 40 is too hot. It makes intuitive sense to us just like the 25,50,75,100 system makes sense to you. I think you (and I about celsius) just feel like these systems make sense because we grew up with it. A totally different system with other numbers would probably also make sense to us if we grew up with it. It's purely personal opinion. And if you think that Fahrenheit is still more a system for the common man than Celsius 'because very cold = 0 and very hot = 100 just makes intuitive sense', it doesn't really make sense that freezing = 32 right? For me it makes sense that 0 = freezing, because I grew up seeing that on the news and knowing that there would be snow/ice on the ground, meaning I needed to be more careful biking everywhere. That feels like a really clean round number to me. Do you see that it's just a matter of opinion? It's really just about what you like more. The one thing that Fahrenheit does kind of do better is that it's a smaller unit of measurement than celsius, which could be nice to know when you need to choose what to wear to match the temperature for example, but in my experience this isn't an issue for me as someone who only uses celsius.
2. The benefit of Celsius: There is really only one thing that differenciates Celsius from Fahrenheit and that is how much more scientifically relevant Celsius is. If I remember correctly you said that that wasn't relevant because Kelvin is used for scientific calculations anyways. Even though that's right, that doesn't change that (simplified) Kelvin is just a version of Celsius that has a lower starting point (To show you, these are some values of Kelvin(K) and Celsius(C) next to each other: K=0 = C=-273, K=273 = C=0, K=373 = C=100). This made Kelvin very easy for me to learn as a child, because it was just -273 of anything I knew already. Kelvin isn't as easy for someone who grows up with Fahrenheit. So logically someone who doesn't grow up with celsius probably makes more mistakes using Kelvin. Which means that you could argue that growing up with Fahrenheit is disadvantageous for these people if they want to enter the scientific field.
Since this is the only thing that truely differenciates Celsius from Fahrenheit aside from personal preference, I hereby declare that Celcius is better than Fahrenheit!
For me this is just a fun brain exercise. Please prove me wrong if you can, hope this was good food for thought!
None of this proves why Celsius is better. Because it isn’t better in any way
I disagree that the metric system is superior in every type of measurement except temperature. There were two carpenters visiting from France talking about their brilliant technique to simplify their jobs by using a 1.2 meter stick instead of the standard 1 meter stick so they hardly ever had to deal with decimal points as 12 can be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 and itself. I said, "oh, like a foot?"
1 inch ="Three barleycorns from the center of the ear placed end to end". Precise right?
@@tonytenbreock8546 Love it, and I'll take you word for it!
Pedantic nit picking here: The US has never used the "Imperial" system. The US Customary System is based on the PRE Imperial British system and thus the USCS is older than "Imperial" The difference is usually seen in VOLUME measures: Imperial pint is 20 Fluid ounces, USCS pint is 16 Fluid ounces for example. But overall, I use metric and USCS in most uses metric IS superior EXCEPT for weather reporting, Fahrenheit is a HUMAN scale: 0 degrees is to damn cold, 100 degrees is too damn hot. But hey, Give someone an inch and they'll take 1.61 kilometers. LOL
I like the more obvious thing where the point at which water turns into a dangerous slippery surface that you could contribute to a fall or sliding your car off the road being negative to be superior.
I grew up in the states but moved Eastern Europe in my mid teens and now live in the UK so I know both scales and can equally adjust to either.
I have no preference as I’m familiar with both but the way I see it it’s slightly easier to think in Celsius since zero is freezing no matter what scale you look at and all you have to keep in mind is 0 to 30 number scale in practical daily use. Where’s with Fahrenheit that number scale triples.
This is one of my hot takes. I believe Metric is superior in every use except temperature. Fahrenheit has a wider range, but its not so wide to where its unusable for day-to-day use like Kelvin.
You're right! -- Fahrenheit is also more precise for the temperatures we commonly use because 1 deg C = 1.8 deg F. In the US we can choose, for example, 68F or 69F for the indoor winter heat temp. in our homes. If you must choose 20C or 21C, that's 68 or 69.8F, a spread of almost 2 deg F- which is less precise. To equal Fahrenheit precision Centigrade users should use half degrees- which is not commonly done- to describe common house or outside temperatures.
This was fun as a playful video, I hope people know not to take it too seriously. Here's my take on it:
I think some of the "you already know how this works even if you don't use it" is cultural bias - as Americans, it's pretty intuitive, but if you didn't grow up with it, it probably isn't. People who live in Sweden or other cold countries might think 80F is hot, but for me, living in Los Angeles, that's great weather. Likewise, someone living in the tropics might feel really cold at 50F - I know for me, that's starting to get into the uncomfortable territory. By the time it hits freezing at 32F, I'm REALLY COLD, and 0F is way beyond just "too cold" for me (and I lived in the Midwest!).
So, how would I design a temperature scale that everyone could use? Well, it'd be informed by my bias if I wanted to base it on comfort. Let's call it degrees X. If 0X was really cold for me, and 100X really hot, I might line that up more like between 30F and 110F. That way, with my scale, 50X is 70F, right in the middle for what I think of as a neutral "room temperature".
The problem is, not everyone is going to agree with my bounds. So, maybe it would be best to base the scale on something objective that we all deal with, like, say, water! Water freezing and boiling are relevant to day to day life - many people live in climates where freezes happen, and that effects how you interact with the outside (maybe you have to scrape ice off of your car, which I do not miss!), and boiling water is important for cooking, which is pretty universal.
Ultimately, I don't think either scale is "better", I think that you're usually just going to like what you grew up using. Celsius can be intuitive as well, I think of it in groups of 5. 40C is something I don't want to be outside in. I'm sure folks may disagree with these groupings too, though, just based on what they like or are used to.
Good video once again King!
This is a great explanation of why certain scales are better than others!
Totally agree. I’m good at numbers and I could do the calculations but I can never recall the equation to multiply because I rarely need to. Being used to feet and inches is one thing but the simplicity of metric measurements is hard to argue against.
I'm from Brazil and I'm used to Celcius. If you tell me it's 25 degrees outside, I'll take a T-shirt and get ready to a comfortable afternoon in Summer Clothes. The feeling that I have in my mind when I read 25 ºC is the same feeling you, Americans have when you read 77 ºF. It's only a matter of using it and get used to it.
I'm from Alaska and I'm used to Farenheit. If you tell me it's 25 degrees outside, I'll take a T-shirt and get ready to a comfortable afternoon in summer clothes. The feeling that I have in my mind when I read 25 F is the same feeling you Brazilians have when you read 25 C because Alaska is just that much cooler.
Disclaimer I'm not actually Alaskan. But they would feel that way.
I saw the title and I figure correctly what Kyle was going to say. I agree. I put everything in Celsius - my thermostats, phone apps, smart watch for about a year. I'm now quite comfortable with Celsius for everyday use. That is if you tell me it's 28 C outside, I don't have to convert to Fahrenheit to know that's a pleasant but just a little warm temperature.
But, mostly due to conversing with other Americans using F, I switched everything to F. I like it better because as Kyle says 0 to 100, cold to hot for air temperature. Nice we can say over 100 to mean really hot and below 0 to say really cold.
You are making no sense. It's pretty important for common man to know when 0 degrees Celsius approaching because below it pipes burst, plants start dying and wiper washing liquid starts freezing, and rain turns into snow and road becomes icy and you need ice scraper and plane de-icer.
Nice video, my Chattanoogan neighbor. You taught me something new. Never looked at it that way.
Celcius is better because it packs more meaning into every degree. If I know that tomorrow is going to be 19 rather than 23 I can plan for the day effectively. 23 is a lot warmer. If you grow up with it, you learn quickly to "feel" every degree. So there's even a big difference between 26, which is pleasantly warm, and 27, which nudges into hot. But Kyle doesn't know this because he didn't grow up with it, and like all of us, he is prejudiced in favor of what he knows.
I believe it's the exact opposite. Non-Americans are used to Celsius and are prejudiced in favor of what they know. I didn't grow up with metric, yet I still see it as superior overall.
Celsius is used in weather and aviation. To me they are the same. Just what you used to. I love that below zero in Celsius marks the freezing point of water.
I agree completely! As an American, I wish were used the metric system. However, Fahrenheit is better for the reasons stated and should be kept. the thing about temperatures compared to the other forms of measurement is that temperature is linear, we never have to convert temperatures within a scale unlike figuring out how many inches are in a mile or centimeters in a kilometer (of course that one is easy). A temperature just is and you only need to convert when jumping from one system to the other. Great explanation about these systems.
Another thing about the freezing and boiling points; Those only work if you're at sea level. If you're up at altitude water boils at a lower temperature because there's less atmospheric pressure which also impacts when water boils. Anyone who lives in mountain areas already knows that cooking times are slightly longer because of this.
Agreed about no conversion within one system.
However, usually you buy the themometer labelled with he scale -- If you have to do it, only needing pure water under certain conditions would still be easier to reproduce than saltwater under certsin conditions plus "the average body without fever".
Geography KING earning his name on this one. Celsius-stans hardest hit.
Long live freedom units! Thanks Kyle!
The term "Freedom units" is actually ironic. We use the system we got from the very nation we went to war against to gain our freedom, WORSE the Metric system was invented by France, The nation that HELPED us gain said freedom. So in REALITY, Metric IS the "freedom units". Also Fahrenheit is neither English or French, We got Fahrenheit from the GERMANS.
The way I see it, the crux of the argument is largely, "Fahrenheit is what I'm familiar with, so it makes more sense to me" -- the same thing my high school students would say about Celsius.
When you're in a place that often sees temperatures just above or just below freezing, Celsius is a HUGE advantage: -1, the road could be icy, +1 and you're probably fine. You don't have to be that familiar with the scale to know what it represents, you know that negative numbers mean slippery surfaces.
But to the first point... if you grew up with Celsius -- which I didn't, as I grew up near Detroit on the Canadian side and we always watched American newscasts in Fahrenheit -- that's going to just seem more natural to you. A hot summer day is 30 and above; a cold winter night is -20 (or, if you're in Saskatoon, -40). So on those grounds it's a matter of taste -- but as someone who's fully converted to Celsius for everyday use, I can assure you that I'm at no disadvantage because, say, Fahrenheit is a finer-grained system (it's irrelevant most of the time).
If you're trying to make an argument on "human experience" grounds... some people find 40 F unbearably cold, and some (like me) find 90 F unbearably hot. Humans have a wide range of experiences and sentiments, but basing a temperature scale on the cold sterility and unwavering (mostly) properties of water, that's just good sense.
In conclusion, the imperial system is just stupid and it all needs to go. Those NASA scientists that forgot to convert one thing from imperial to metric and lost a multi-hundred-million-dollar Mars mission... none of that would've happened if the US had the guts to fully commit to metric in the '70s like they promised they would. Plus, basing the length of something on the king's actual foot? Madness.
And finally... because the US is so close to us, and so dominant, they are effectively preventing Canada from becoming as metric as we should be. I know my height in feet and inches better than in centimetres, and that's just not right.
I live in Minnesota which frequently gets below freezing and usually stays below freezing most of the winter.
Its not hard to remember 32 F. It really isnt.
Wrong
Roads don't usually get icy at 32°, because most places with real winters will dump salt and brine on the roads.
Salt becomes ineffective at--you guessed it--Zero degrees Fahrenheit.
@michaelwald6671 Also roads arent gonna freeze right away lol Its not like it drops from 33 to 32 and all of a sudden, a puddle of water is a sheet of ice.
It also wont make a perfectly dry surface become icy.
100% agree
Solid video Kyle, surprisingly interesting!
Not to be contrarian because I love your channel, Kyle. But, this is just my personal experience: As a 60-year-old American, I have found myself using Celsius a lot lately because I have been traveling overseas more and watching more UA-cam videos by non-Americans. As a result, I am getting more accustomed to Celsius and I agree with other commenters who use both systems that the supposed human comfort scale really doesn’t matter that much in what system is used. It’s just what you're familiar with. Anyway, my physical Fahrenheit comfort range is about 30 to 90 and not 0 to 100. There is no magical difference between 100 and 101. The only thing I’ve noticed is that my nostrils tend to freeze at around 0 and driving on paved roads starts to get scary at 32. So, for me, I think of the Celsius comfort range as about -10 to 35, and the roads get scary at 0. Not really all that difficult.
Maybe, we should just all use Kelvin and forget about these other systems.
Fahrenheit is a bit more so, but both Celsius and Fahrenheit are fairly arbitrary. Whether you think one is better than the other basically comes down to what you're used to. I personally prefer Celsius, mostly because it's easier to remember 0 and 100C than 32 and 212F.
All the Europeans accusing you of being American-- when Fahrenheit was invented in Europe.
Also Europe used to use Fahrenheit too before they switched
This thought crossed my mind last night when I was driving, that because of the obvious larger variance between numbers in F, that it is an indication of a more precise temperature feel, lol…but C gets love because freezing is a nice round 0
And now Kyle has a video about this random thought, love it.
I love the fahrenheit scale, it's the primary unit of measure that I firmly believe is superior in Imperial than Metric.
All because humans can easily relate. 0=very cold, 100=very hot. 78, perfect
32 is a popsicle, so 0 is way beyond very cold.
And 50 makes sense being the middle, because it’s an awkward temp that can feel cold or warm depending on weather conditions and what season you’re in.
50 should be perfect if Fahrenheit were a relatable system
@@thistamndypo I’d say most people would consider the perfect temperature to be moderately warm, as opposite to the middle of the scale.
@@vidcas1711 but then the "very cold" and "very hot" you described are not relative. 0°F is much colder than 100°F is hot.