• cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      I fully agree with that. It’s also quite easy to shift between the 2. I just had the difference drilled into me way too much, at university.

    • ByteWizard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      Fahrenheit is better for human-survivable temps.

      Fahrenheit:

      • 0° - Really cold
      • 50° - So-so
      • 100° - Really hot

      Celsius:

      • 0° - Cold
      • 50° - Extremely hot
      • 100° - Dead

      Kelvin:

      • 0° - Dead
      • 50° - Dead
      • 100° - Dead
      • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Some people seem to have this misconception that “0F cold 100F hot” is somehow an innate or intuitive concept for everyone. It’s not, brother, you just happen to be used to it. I have absolutely no idea if I should wear a coat with 62F or not, or for any other F temperature for that matter.

        At least 0C and 100C have very practical references that anyone can recognise, but what the hell even is 0F and 100F?

        Also, not sure why you’re trying to shoehorn 0-100F to 0-100C.

        When talking about weather, it’s going to be in a range like 0C (cold) / 20C (nice) / 40C (hot), which is equally arbitrary but probably more useful than 0F/50F/100F anyway depending on where you live: my neck of the woods goes to 0C in a harsh winter, and to 40C in the peak of summer.

        And do you use F for stuff like cooking? What purpose is 0F or 100F there?

        How about stuff like chemistry or physics? I remember formulas in C or K, occasionally having to add 273.5. Is F used, or you just use K/C and convert at the start?