Jefferson and the American "metric" system

[Paul Spring]

In 1790, Thomas Jefferson proposed a new decimal-based system of measurements of his own design to become the official system of measurements of the United States. This system used traditional English names for units of measurement, but made the basic units multiples of 10 instead of the wide variety of different multiples in the traditional English system of measurement.

Congress took no action on Jefferson's suggestion, but what if this system of measurement had been implemented, giving the United States a decimal-based system even before France adopted its metric system?

http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/usmetric.html provides a little description, as well as a brief history of official measurements in the United States, including the fact that the United States has, in a way, already been officially using the metric system for a long time.

 

[Thande]

I posted this idea a while ago, but it just degenerated into a flamewar. Hope this does better.

I imagine the American system won't be widely known by the time of the French Revolutionaries creating the OTL metric system, so we might end up with multiple "rationalist" systems, none of which are universal...

This idea of keeping the names of measurements but changing the quantities, though it seems like madness to me (can you imagine how confused people would be reading old documents?) has been used by modern China.

 

[Redem]

I posted this idea a while ago, but it just degenerated into a flamewar. Hope this does better.

.

How the hell mesurement system discussion end up in flame war

oh wait I've just realise were I was and that were are humans

 

[Admiral Brown]

I know this is offtopic but, is the US the only nation that doesn't have the metric system NOWADAYS? Or are there others?

 

[ColeMercury]

I know this is offtopic but, is the US the only nation that doesn't have the metric system NOWADAYS? Or are there others?

The US is the only nation that OFFICIALLY doesn't use the metric system. Some countries like the UK do have the metric system as standard but tend to use the imperial system alongside it, and of course there's still common expressions like "It's miles away" or "I'm six feet tall".

 

[MrP]

I know this is offtopic but, is the US the only nation that doesn't have the metric system NOWADAYS? Or are there others?

The US is the only nation that OFFICIALLY doesn't use the metric system. Some countries like the UK do have the metric system as standard but tend to use the imperial system alongside it, and of course there's still common expressions like "It's miles away" or "I'm six feet tall".

It's actually more confusing than that. None of our road signs can be in metric - they have to be in Imperial or they're illegal. Practically everything else is sort-of metric. For instance, because people were very annoyed at the possibility of not being able to buy a pint of milk when it became illegal not to label it by its metric name, we have 563 ml of milk which is labelled - in smaller writing - a pint. It's a weird system, and the schools make sure not to teach us either Imperial or Metric properly. This is cunning, because Metric is easier to learn, so Imperial is bound to die out. But it does leave people confused about how big a mile, for example, is.

 

[Rhesus2]

I know this is offtopic but, is the US the only nation that doesn't have the metric system NOWADAYS? Or are there others?

The US is weird, because the metric system is standard for everything, except when it deals directly with the public. So any reports, technical or scientific studies, or what have you are metric, but anything the the public/consumer come in contact with is in feet, pounds, pints, etc. There was a huge public backlash when Carter tried to get the US to use the metric system officially. I guess no one wanted to learn a "new" way of doing things. Personally, I like the metric system in theory, but I'm not used to it. I can't conceptualize how much a meter or a kilo is intuitively, I have to calculate it in terms of feet and pounds for it to make sense.

 

[Nova]

The metric system is so much easier to use, especially when it comes to liquid measures.

 

[MrP]

The metric system is so much easier to use, especially when it comes to liquid measures.

I think it's probably subjective. I tend to find it easier to work with Imperial measurements.

 

[carlton_bach]

You're invariably best at whatever system you grew up with. But the Metric system works best for calculations because it's all decimal-based and the units interlock (if you know the cubic volume of a tank, you can tell how many litres fit into it and how heavy it will be when full in your head, if only approximately).

AFAIK the United States is one of the very few countries not to use the metric system in all aspects of life, but there are others - IIRC Yemen is one.

And even in countries that have long been metric, some non-metric units survive. In Germany, the Pfund (pound, officially set at 500 grammes) and various local beverage measures are still in common use.

 

[Uther_Pendragon]

I think it's probably subjective. I tend to find it easier to work with Imperial measurements.

just could tell us, without caculator, how many pints do you have in one cubic yards?

with metric system it is a lot easier: 1 cubic meter = 1000 liter. period.

 

[Thande]

The whole thing about the metric system being easier to convert in your head and therefore better for science and technology...yes, it does make sense on paper, but I've slowly become convinced that that's bunkum. After all, as has been said above, the United States not only uses pints of milk and ounces of cheese, but pounds-per-square-inch when its researchers at DARPA calculate the lift of the F-22 Raptor or whatever...and America continues to lead the way in science and technology in many areas. Is that despite their use of the imperial system, or because of it? I'm inclined to think the latter - after all, if you're always converting things based on multiplying or dividing by 12 and 27 and 24, you're going to have a better grasp of mental arithmetic than a European who only has to put extra zeroes on the end.

 

[cerebus]

Metrology is something I am knowledgeable in. The America system is based on the British (18th century) system with the usual changes made to emphasise they are different. As such it can be traced back to medieval statutes. The advantages of tons, stones, pounds and ounces are they are easy to create with simple equipment and easy to split into simple binary fractions. (1/2, 1/4 , 1/16 etc). Yards feet inches are easy to split into ½ and 1/3.

I assume this reflects the different uses and designs of early measurement. Equipment , food by weight and cloth by length. It was common then for different trades to use their own measures.

Working in a decimal system is of great advantage to a scientist or engineer as it is easy to scale up or down by factors of 10. The disadvantage is that it is harder to make the standards from scratch. However a good system of traceability, which most governments had by 1700, moves this problem to a single specialist organisation.

Franklyn was a great man in the 18th century and the only American scientist of note for a hundred years. If he pushed through such a system, even if America used it only for official purposes, then I think the French could have copied it, though they would use their own names and standards.

Now if the entire world is (officially) Franklyn decimal by 1900, perhaps using a mixture of American and French names for units what does this affect ?

This will help spread of science a little and make movement of engineering skill easier but I suspect any changes will be subtle. Perhaps one or two more great scientists per hundred years and a slightly better quality of engineering.

Of course this could all back fire and the world ends up with the Franklyn system trapped in the scientific ghetto and every country, trade and industry using its own measures. World wide I mean not just in America as OTL.

Anyone for a milliFranklyn of beer?



Thande

I too get the feeling my younger colleagues are sadly limmited in maths but I put it down to the rise of calculators, the decline in proper maths teaching and the natural grumpiness of middle age. I have never connected it to the metric system.

If you are claiming the Imperial system gives Americans a better methematical knowledge then I think the statistics are against you

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

I know this is offtopic but, is the US the only nation that doesn't have the metric system NOWADAYS? Or are there others?

According to wiki, which is never wrong about anything, there's also Burma and Liberia.

 

[Fabilius]

The whole thing about the metric system being easier to convert in your head and therefore better for science and technology...yes, it does make sense on paper, but I've slowly become convinced that that's bunkum. After all, as has been said above, the United States not only uses pints of milk and ounces of cheese, but pounds-per-square-inch when its researchers at DARPA calculate the lift of the F-22 Raptor or whatever...and America continues to lead the way in science and technology in many areas. Is that despite their use of the imperial system, or because of it? I'm inclined to think the latter - after all, if you're always converting things based on multiplying or dividing by 12 and 27 and 24, you're going to have a better grasp of mental arithmetic than a European who only has to put extra zeroes on the end.

That's true, the metric system is so simple any dummy can use it.

How ever, couldn't you by the same logic claim the latin numerals would be better for us to use since they are more complicated than arabic numerals? I mean we would have to memorise a lot more signs.

And of course from the point of view of a latin mathematician it's a lot more easier than...

 

[MrP]

I think it's probably subjective. I tend to find it easier to work with Imperial measurements.

just could tell us, without caculator, how many pints do you have in one cubic yards?

with metric system it is a lot easier: 1 cubic meter = 1000 liter. period.

Read my posts, old man.

the schools make sure not to teach us either Imperial or Metric properly. This is cunning, because Metric is easier to learn, so Imperial is bound to die out.

In a daily way, Imperial is more convenient for me. That's all I mean.

EDIT: Incidentally, you know 1 cubic metre = 1,000 litres. I would have had to look that up, too. Because -

the schools make sure not to teach us either Imperial or Metric properly.

Anyway, let's not keep dragging this off at a tangent, and get back to the challenge, eh?

 

[Susano]

I posted this idea a while ago, but it just degenerated into a flamewar. Hope this does better.

..he says, and goes on to give opinions already in his next post

 

[Paul Spring]

Valiantly attempting to push this thread back to its original purpose ...

I imagine the American system won't be widely known by the time of the French Revolutionaries creating the OTL metric system, so we might end up with multiple "rationalist" systems, none of which are universal...

This idea of keeping the names of measurements but changing the quantities, though it seems like madness to me (can you imagine how confused people would be reading old documents?) has been used by modern China.

I would tend to agree that the French would choose their own decimal-based system. Even if the US system had become widely known, French intellectuals and politicians might be reluctant to copy a system developed by a new, "upstart" nation that lacked the long intellectual and cultural tradition of France - even if quite a few in France admired certain aspects of the United States.

If this happens, you could get two rival decimal-based systems. The French system will have more reach and prestige at first, but the US system might compete more as the 19th century goes on. By the early 20th century, perhaps the continental European countries will almost all use the French metric system, the British Empire and Commonwealth use the Imperial system, and the USA and some nations within its economic/political sphere of influence such as Mexico, Cuba, and some other Caribbean, Central American, and even South American countries would use the American decimal system.

 

[Fabilius]

Valiantly attempting to push this thread back to its original purpose ...



I would tend to agree that the French would choose their own decimal-based system. Even if the US system had become widely known, French intellectuals and politicians might be reluctant to copy a system developed by a new, "upstart" nation that lacked the long intellectual and cultural tradition of France - even if quite a few in France admired certain aspects of the United States.

If this happens, you could get two rival decimal-based systems. The French system will have more reach and prestige at first, but the US system might compete more as the 19th century goes on. By the early 20th century, perhaps the continental European countries will almost all use the French metric system, the British Empire and Commonwealth use the Imperial system, and the USA and some nations within its economic/political sphere of influence such as Mexico, Cuba, and some other Caribbean, Central American, and even South American countries would use the American decimal system.

And then the soviets decide to invent their own and a new one gets implemented in all communist countries, including some african countries.

This is not counting China and India which both at a different nationalist phase invent their own special systems.

 

[Paul Spring]

Bump, Bump, Bump -

Any other thoughts?