this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
225 points (92.1% liked)

Memes

51515 readers
1685 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 86 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Kelvin is an absolute scale, not measured in degrees

[–] fastandcurious@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Isn’t radians a measure of angles, or am I not getting the joke?

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That was the joke, which I was trying to help further by pretending that there was nothing wrong with that.

[–] mod_pp@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

Who are you so wise in the ways of science?

[–] wischi@programming.dev 13 points 2 years ago

The joke is because of "degrees" (also to measure angles) and "radians"

[–] Hazmatastic@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I mean, you could just convert the Farenheit or Celsius degrees to radians like they were angle degrees. "Bake at 6.109 radians for 45 minutes" still can mean "Bake at 350 degrees for 45 minutes" if you accept the implicit Farenheit scale. Radians would still be ambiguous regarding the base scale used, but it's as ambiguous as "degrees" is so not really an issue.

So I mean, there's no real reason to do it but also no reason you can't.

[–] Pulptastic@midwest.social 3 points 2 years ago

You have to specify radians fahrenheit for that so we don't confuse it with radians Celsius and blacken the thing.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Except temperature degrees aren't related angle degrees. You'd be using a pun as a unit conversion.

[–] Hazmatastic@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh they're unrelated, and it's a pointless conversion I know.

Technically speaking these would be unrelated radians under the same name measuring different units. But you could still do it if you really wanted

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 2 points 2 years ago

Not sure if amused or horrified.

[–] Paradachshund@lemmy.today 5 points 2 years ago

Well look at mister smarty-pants with his science facts over here!

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

My scale for expressing mean kinetic energy flux is superior to your scale for expressing mean kinetic energy flux. I have formed an identity around this and will smugly argue about it on the internet.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

Hey now, I don't argue for Celsius, I just argue against people saying Fahrenheit is better for silly reasons.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Gradians.

mind-explosion.gif

[–] Venat0r@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 2 points 2 years ago

Multivectors.

[–] CallumWells@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Just go for Fahrenkelsius, it's the obvious choice

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Joule is the best unit you can literally apply it to everything because it's essentially a raw unit of energy.

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Joules is unfortunately a vector because it's over a distance in a direction. Temperature is a scalar. Sometimes scalars are better than vectors.

Edit:Ok for those who don't actually understand joules in its units J=KG•M^2/s^2 or N•D, it's force which is a vector over a distance, this requires a magnitude and direction. This is because force is a vector and Joules is using force. All of you are starting to be confidently incorrect... Joules is a vector you can search it up.

[–] wischi@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Joules is unfortunately a vector because it's over a distance in a direction.

What? Joule is an energy unit and energy is a scalar quantity and not a vector. There is no "energy direction" and no "distance".

Edit: even your edit doesn't make sense. Provide a source that says that energy or joule is somehow a vector.

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If you set one of the axis to 1 than it's effectively a scalar that's why I love it so much.

[–] poinck@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Please, someone fix the meme. Joule x a vector (represented by angles measured in radians).

[–] Buttons@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago

This confuses me. That's why I only use fairandheight.