• borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 days ago

          We’re more familiar with 5.56x45mm thanks to all our school shootings thank you very much.

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            In the same way a US ton and a metric ton is like 10% different, a 556 bullet is actually 5.7 mm across.

            • Morphit @feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              8 days ago

              Because the minor diameter of the barrel is 5.56 mm and the major diameter is 5.69 mm. If the bullet were smaller than that then the propellant would blow past it. They didn’t make a 'murican millimetre like they did with the imperial system.

          • BalooWasWahoo@links.hackliberty.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 days ago

            I would make a bet that more mass shootings are done with 9mm. Depending on which shootings they consider ‘mass’ I see estimates from 60-80% for handgun usage. I’m sure the cheap .22 is a large number, but 9mm is probably right up there. There is a large bias in reporting the school shootings and shootings involving rifles by the media. They almost ignore the others.

      • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        In point of fact Americans have gotten impressive results out of far more complicated metrics than metric. It’s not a matter of understanding, it’s a matter of pride. And of not having to buy all new tools.

      • pruwyben@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 days ago

        The best system would have 0 at a mild, comfortable temperature, and go up or down by 100 degrees per one degrees Fahrenheit.

        • Mac@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          But mild and comfortable is different for different people who are acclimated to different weather.

          We need a defined ‘mild’ temperature. i vote for 70F/21C.
          It’s a bit chilly for the warm weathered folks and a bit warm for the cold weathered folks. Seems reasonable but I’m open to suggestions.

          • pruwyben@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            I’d adjust it to 68/20 just so it lines up with whole numbers in both systems. And on second thought, make it 90 per degree Fahrenheit so any whole F or C value can convert to a whole number.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            it needs to be a range, you can’t really just have a single point, something like 50f to 70f would be good. Some people like a little below, some people like a little above, the 60s are generally pretty comfy all around though.

            We also need to consider clothing as well. Which i do in this case.

      • meeeeetch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 days ago

        You can absolutely yell about that. And when Fahrenheit flips to negative, you’re ready to express some big feelings about how fucking cold it is.

    • CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      And Rankine would be even better than Kelvin in terms of “big number go brrr.” Water boils at 671 R.

      Of course, Rankine is the most obnoxious unit I’ve ever had to deal with, but those numbers sure are big!

    • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      OK, but with Rankine, if it’s 101 out, you can go Five Hundred and SIXTY degrees??!

    • socsa@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Please raise this temperature by 1.4x10^-23 Joules - statements of the utterly deranged

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Joules are energy. You need thermal capacity to turn them into temperature.