It must be in that small part of the world where temperature is measured in Fahrenheit. Eurasian, African, Australian or even South American crickets would never do that.
In Galen's scale, the 0 point is 22 °C, an alright room temperature, but the others are described too vaguely for us to convert. It might also be nonlinear. See the explainxkcd.com article
Ohh ok thanks for that link! So it is non linear. But not even a consistent curve like log, just if less than zero some factor, if positive a different one. Yuck.
That's the conjecture by Randall and Explain XKCD wiki editors. We can't tell either way, he just wasn't specific enough. All we know is that 0 on the scale is 22 °C and that it goes 4 steps up to "very hot" and 4 steps down to "very cold".
Fahrenheit used the temperature of the human body to create his system, which makes a lot more sense than other systems.
What is 0°F in terms of the human body? I'm guessing that 100°F is supposed to be a normal human body temperature, but in reality that will vary from person to person and everybody I've met is usually 97-99 unless they have a fever.
In Celsius/Centigrade, 0° is the freezing point of water at 1 atmosphere of pressure, and 100° is the boiling point.
In Kelvin, 0 is absolute zero, and it scales with Celsius/Centigrade because anchoring it to water just makes sense.
Fahrenheit is fucking silly and people only defend it because it's what they were familiar with growing up, so they teach the next generation the same thing, thus perpetuating the cycle of tradition for the sake of tradition.
There is a theoretical max temperature, the Planck Temperature ≈ 1.416 x 10^42 K. It's the temperature at which the wavelength of emitted light is the Planck length.
Basically, a system at planck temperature probably would consist of many tiny black holes, and adding energy to said system would create a larger black hole, thereby lowering the temperature.
That sounds like a misconception based on the misconception that the Planck Length is the smallest distance possible. Admittedly, I dropped out of physics 10 years ago so I might have no idea what I'm talking about.
The idea is that the tiny black holes are planck scale and they evaporate before they get anywhere near each other. Picture this:
It takes 10^20 Planck lengths to equal the diameter of a proton. It takes 10^20 protons to equal the diameter of the earth. And it takes 10^20 earths to equal the diameter of the observable universe.
Simplified: A black hole is the result of density – how much mass you cram into how little space. If something is heavy enough, even light passing near it gets pulled in and swallowed, so there's some area where no light escapes: a black hole.
The difficulty is that you need a lot of gravity to bend the course of light. Gravity gets stronger the closer you get to the center, so at a certain distance, it will be strong enough no matter how little mass the object has.
But most objects are simply too large: Light will bounce off without ever getting that close to the center. You'd need to squeeze them together real hard to make them small enough, but there are other forces trying to keep them in shape that will resist you.
What you mean with "a whole lot of stuff" is the way more stable black holes work in space: A bunch of stuff so heavy that its own gravity is stronger than the forces trying to keep shape. If it's strong enough, it can pull itself together so close that it gets smaller than that distance. Thus, there's now an area around it where light can be trapped.
If you involve quantum physics, things get fucky, and supposedly there actually is some radiation still escaping, which is what the other post referred to, but I'm out of my depth there. There are also different types of black holes with their own complications, a bunch of details I skipped and a lot more I don't even know.
Space is awesome and big and full of nothing and tons of tiny, really fascinating bits of not-nothing sprinkled in, and we could spend our entire lives studying it and never know just how much we don't.
I agree with you, except that I think the time system is great. It was deliberately designed to be maximally divisible, and makes a lot of sense in that manner. 12 hours of daylight— a highly divisible number, with 60 small (minuscule, or “minute”) divisions of the hour, which is even MORE divisible than 12. Then when time keeping got more accurate, they added a second division of 60 more parts, and… well, called ‘em seconds.
Basically, 12 and 60 are just so divisible they make really good bases.
huh? how is the freezing point and boiling point of water made up? how is the temperature of the human body better in any way?
The freezing and boiling points of water are by far the most logical reference points since anyone who wants to calibrate a thermometer will have access to water, and needs only go to the nearest ocean and bring some water to freezing and then boiling and making marks at each.
No mate look on the right side, the number 20 is repeated. Ye imperial units are fucked but we are not at a point where 20 Celsius is equal to 2 different Fahrenheit values.
US and ... maybe Israel? Those are the two countries that use the US "Simple English" while the rest of us know what a U is for and how to say Z... so if they also both used F that would track.
As always, metrics with clear rules are always better as random metrics by bodyparts of an King in the past, apart avoiding errors. Ask the NASA, crashing 2 Mars probes using the Imperial system.
I was trying to think of any situation where this would be useful and the only thing I come up with is a way to keep kids occupied during a camping trip.
Yeah, I'm going to hunt one down, and isolate it from all the others just so I can count its chirps so the count won't be screwed up by being confused by other chirpers - all to avoid simply looking at all the other sources of said information that are much more readily available and convenient
Unless you're doing some sort of environmental science experiment while living in a post-apocalyptic world where every pre-existing analog thermometer device for accomplishing this has somehow been destroyed, this is utterly useless.
You’re telling me you cant keep track of 30-45 simple chirps off a standard reference cricket in a 15 second period? Did you even go to school dude?
That depends on whether it's a frictionless sphere.
What about vector forces, like the wind, gravity. Not even getting into humidity and ability to hear specific sound frequencies.
And then we have to deal with... Math.
Not a fan. Let's ignore those.
Fuck
Maybe you should read a book friend.
Counting the negative chirps is the worst. Like, why is there a -20ch marker if it's never -20?
Cricket will go "yeeep" if the temperature is in the negative Fahrenheit
Check out Cricketunes cry for a great cricket sound
It must be in that small part of the world where temperature is measured in Fahrenheit. Eurasian, African, Australian or even South American crickets would never do that.
Everything except metric
There are lots of cursed options
https://xkcd.com/3001/
Wtf is going on with Dalton
It's a logarithmic scale based on Kelvin, but with constants shoved in there so 0 and 100 would agree with Celsius.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459851/john-daltons-temperature-scale
I'm more confused about Galen. -4 to 4, 0 is "normal"? 50 c is "normal"? For what??
In Galen's scale, the 0 point is 22 °C, an alright room temperature, but the others are described too vaguely for us to convert. It might also be nonlinear. See the explainxkcd.com article
Ohh ok thanks for that link! So it is non linear. But not even a consistent curve like log, just if less than zero some factor, if positive a different one. Yuck.
That's the conjecture by Randall and Explain XKCD wiki editors. We can't tell either way, he just wasn't specific enough. All we know is that 0 on the scale is 22 °C and that it goes 4 steps up to "very hot" and 4 steps down to "very cold".
His degrees X would be a good way to show changes over long periods of time by simply graphing the annual adjustments.
[email protected]
What is 0°F in terms of the human body? I'm guessing that 100°F is supposed to be a normal human body temperature, but in reality that will vary from person to person and everybody I've met is usually 97-99 unless they have a fever.
In Celsius/Centigrade, 0° is the freezing point of water at 1 atmosphere of pressure, and 100° is the boiling point.
In Kelvin, 0 is absolute zero, and it scales with Celsius/Centigrade because anchoring it to water just makes sense.
Fahrenheit is fucking silly and people only defend it because it's what they were familiar with growing up, so they teach the next generation the same thing, thus perpetuating the cycle of tradition for the sake of tradition.
There is a theoretical max temperature, the Planck Temperature ≈ 1.416 x 10^42 K. It's the temperature at which the wavelength of emitted light is the Planck length.
Basically, a system at planck temperature probably would consist of many tiny black holes, and adding energy to said system would create a larger black hole, thereby lowering the temperature.
That sounds like a misconception based on the misconception that the Planck Length is the smallest distance possible. Admittedly, I dropped out of physics 10 years ago so I might have no idea what I'm talking about.
The idea is that the tiny black holes are planck scale and they evaporate before they get anywhere near each other. Picture this:
It takes 10^20 Planck lengths to equal the diameter of a proton. It takes 10^20 protons to equal the diameter of the earth. And it takes 10^20 earths to equal the diameter of the observable universe.
Simplified: A black hole is the result of density – how much mass you cram into how little space. If something is heavy enough, even light passing near it gets pulled in and swallowed, so there's some area where no light escapes: a black hole.
The difficulty is that you need a lot of gravity to bend the course of light. Gravity gets stronger the closer you get to the center, so at a certain distance, it will be strong enough no matter how little mass the object has.
But most objects are simply too large: Light will bounce off without ever getting that close to the center. You'd need to squeeze them together real hard to make them small enough, but there are other forces trying to keep them in shape that will resist you.
What you mean with "a whole lot of stuff" is the way more stable black holes work in space: A bunch of stuff so heavy that its own gravity is stronger than the forces trying to keep shape. If it's strong enough, it can pull itself together so close that it gets smaller than that distance. Thus, there's now an area around it where light can be trapped.
If you involve quantum physics, things get fucky, and supposedly there actually is some radiation still escaping, which is what the other post referred to, but I'm out of my depth there. There are also different types of black holes with their own complications, a bunch of details I skipped and a lot more I don't even know.
Space is awesome and big and full of nothing and tons of tiny, really fascinating bits of not-nothing sprinkled in, and we could spend our entire lives studying it and never know just how much we don't.
About the maximum temperature.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHyctwgE6m4
Actually both freezing and boiling vary depending on your altitude...
I agree with you, except that I think the time system is great. It was deliberately designed to be maximally divisible, and makes a lot of sense in that manner. 12 hours of daylight— a highly divisible number, with 60 small (minuscule, or “minute”) divisions of the hour, which is even MORE divisible than 12. Then when time keeping got more accurate, they added a second division of 60 more parts, and… well, called ‘em seconds.
Basically, 12 and 60 are just so divisible they make really good bases.
huh? how is the freezing point and boiling point of water made up? how is the temperature of the human body better in any way?
The freezing and boiling points of water are by far the most logical reference points since anyone who wants to calibrate a thermometer will have access to water, and needs only go to the nearest ocean and bring some water to freezing and then boiling and making marks at each.
Celsius is the precise opposite of random.
okay so yes you're not serious and just trying to get a rise out of people, great to have that confirmed.
least convoluted way to measure a US measurement system
Is that an AI generated thermometer? The scaling makes no sense whatsoever lol
It makes absolutely no sense lol. Definitely AI
No, it's what happens of you don't use a metric unit
No mate look on the right side, the number 20 is repeated. Ye imperial units are fucked but we are not at a point where 20 Celsius is equal to 2 different Fahrenheit values.
Thanks! I looked at the wrong side at first
No, I was just kidding, including the first comment. Both sides are messed up, it was a variation of the "anything but metric" meme.
That's a grasshopper.
No wonder the weather has been so weird all week! We had the wrong insect controlling it!
What use is the Fahrenheit measurement though? I thought only one or two countries use it.
Two countries and crickets apparently.
Just as God intended
US and ... maybe Israel? Those are the two countries that use the US "Simple English" while the rest of us know what a U is for and how to say Z... so if they also both used F that would track.
That's a grasshopper.
Exactly. Quick image search will show you that cricket looks like this:
We should stop using Fahrenheit and Celsius and use chirp
Crickets in Antarctica be like: prihc
In Celsius it is chirps in 8 seconds + 5 (Dolbear's Law), but if you listen a single "Chirpffffffsss", than better stay at home
About half the time and an easier addition? Metric wins again.
As always, metrics with clear rules are always better as random metrics by bodyparts of an King in the past, apart avoiding errors. Ask the NASA, crashing 2 Mars probes using the Imperial system.
And people say farenheight doesn't have a use...
This is bullshit
I was trying to think of any situation where this would be useful and the only thing I come up with is a way to keep kids occupied during a camping trip.
Europeans in shambles
Yeah, I'm going to hunt one down, and isolate it from all the others just so I can count its chirps so the count won't be screwed up by being confused by other chirpers - all to avoid simply looking at all the other sources of said information that are much more readily available and convenient
Unless you're doing some sort of environmental science experiment while living in a post-apocalyptic world where every pre-existing analog thermometer device for accomplishing this has somehow been destroyed, this is utterly useless.
100 degrees Celsius is defined as the boiling point at exactly _1.0 atmospheric pressure _
Am I the only one who thought that was a really shiny grasshopper?