Hi Clarence:
On Mon, 07 May 2001 20:25:27 -0500, Clarence Verge wrote:
> I don't mind the metric system in all other respects, but the Centigrade/
> Celsius temperature scale is just plain stupid for relating to the human
> sensations.
> With F you know that 0 is bloody cold and 100 is too damn hot - the degrees
> of discomfort are about the same, and you will survive.
This is an interesting point for you to make, but who are you as an
individual living in a temperate climate zone to arbitrarily say that zero
degrees is the point at which it becomes bloody cold and a hundred degrees is
the exact mark when it is too damn hot for the human body to well withstand
without considerable discomfort? An Eskimo or an African tribesman might
have a quite different perception as to when it is bloody cold or when it is
too damn hot. Their sensations are just as valid to them as your sensations
are to you. One's chances of surviving the heat or the cold are dirctly
related to the particular climate to which his body has become accustomed.
> With C you find 0 rather pleasant and at 100 you've been dead a long time.
With C, 0 is when water freezes and 100 is when water boils (assuming
a sea level mean atmospheric pressure of 30 milibars). This is a most
clearly defined scientific standard that all of us can universally relate
to. There are absolutely no subjective sensations involved in our
judgement here.
> If they wanted to be scientific about it, why didn't they use the Kelvin
> scale ? At least there can be SOME logical argument for THAT.
Zero degrees Kelvin is defined as the temperature at which absolutely
nothing happens, and at which point absolutely nothing can be caused to
happen. We might well assume this temperature as a most logical starting
point for a temperature scale.
So, Kelvin is based on the point at which nothing happens. Celsius is
based on the points at which water changes states from liquid to solid or
to gaseous form. Both the Kelvin scales and the Celsius scales are
scientifically defined. They both make perfect sense to me.
Does anyone know when and how and by whom the Farenheit scale was developed?
Is the Farenheit scale based on any scientific observations or theory, or is
it just an arbitrary scale based on somebody's subjective sensations as to
what's hot and what's not?
Maybe we don't really need a Farenheit scale any more than we need a
Clarence scale.
Regards,
Sam Heywood
-- See our Big Gizmotimetemp at
-- http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/VA/Mt_Jackson.gif
