You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-29 points

I’ll also defend fractional measurements over decimal to my dying breath. Decimal measurements can’t express precision very well at all. You can only increase or decrease precision by a power of 10.

If your measurement is precise to a quarter of a unit, how do you express that in decimal? “.25” is implying that your measurement is precise to 1/100th - misrepresenting precision by a factor of 25.

Meanwhile with fractions it’s easy. 1/4. Oh, your measurement of 1/4 meter is actually super duper precise? Great! Just don’t reduce the fraction.

928/3712 is the same number as 1/4 or .25, but now you know exactly how precise the measurement is. Whereas with a decimal measurement you either have to say it’s precise to 1/1000th (0.250), which is massively understating the precision, or 1/10000th (0.2500), which is massively overstating it.

Fractional measurements are awesome.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

This is one of the dumbest fucking trolls I’ve ever seen.

Congratulations? I guess?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Honestly, I don’t give a shit either way. Wish us 'mericans were on the same wavelength as the rest of the world, but we’re awful in so many ways it doesn’t even register.

However, this troll is gold and I think you’re all sleeping on his genius

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

i’ve never heard of anyone using non-reduced fractions to measure precision. if you go into a machine shop and ask for a part to be milled to 16/64”, they will ask you what precision you need, they would never assume that means 16/64”±1/128”.

if you need custom precision in any case, you can always specify that by hand, fractional or decimal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

But you can’t specify it with decimal. That’s my point. How do you tell the machine operator it needs to be precise to the 64th in decimal? “0.015625” implies precision over 15,000x as precise as 1/64th. The difference between 1/10 and 1/100 is massive, and decimal has no way of expressing it with significant figures.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

sure you can, you say “i need a hole with diameter 0.25” ± 0.015625“”. it doesn’t matter that you have more sig figs when you state your precision

but regardless, that’s probably not the precision you care about. there’s a good chance that you actually want something totally different, like 0.25±0.1”. with decimal, it’s exceptionally clear what that means, even for complicated/very small decimals. doing the same thing fractionally has to be written as 1/4±1/10”, meaning you have to figure out what that range of values are (7/20” to 3/20”)

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

No measured value will be perfectly precise, so it doesn’t make sense to use that as a criteria for a system of measurement. You’re never going to be able to cut a board to exactly 1/3 of a foot, so it doesn’t matter that the metric value will be rounded a bit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Not “a bit”. You can have a 9x difference in precision and be unable to record it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This feels like such a niche reason to prefer fractional measurements.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’m scratching my head, wondering why all the downvotes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’ve always sucked at math tbh, but fractional measurements are my jam. It goes faster in my head and I can visualize things better.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Strange Planet by Nathan W. Pyle

!nathanwpyle@lemmy.world

Create post

A community dedicated to Strange Planet comics by Nathan W. Pyle.

Community stats

  • 1.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 64

    Posts

  • 1.1K

    Comments

Community moderators