Celsius, Kelvin and Fahrenheit are clear. I suppose one of the other ones is Rankine. What’s the last one?
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
131 points (90.2% liked)
Funny: Home of the Haha
5390 readers
1881 users here now
Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.
Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Other Communities:
-
/c/[email protected] - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/[email protected] - General memes
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Ohh, Rankine, thank you! I only remembered Rheamur - there you go. 😊
Glad to help each other out xD
Unless you’re doing scientific research, absolute zero is pretty much useless, so…
As an engineer this is a comically incorrect take. Absolute zero is useful as an absolute reference in the same way zero of anything is. Try doing anything more complex than high school physics and the practical necessity for an absolute temperature reference becomes obvious. For fucks sake they even bothered to make an imperial version. Rankine is just Fahrenheit shifted to have zero be absolute.
Calm down Wolowitz
For distance and mass, zero means no distance and no mass.
For temperature though having none means no kinetic energy of atoms/molecules. It's absolute zero, the zero Kelvin. So the other units are the weird ones.
But since zero Kelvin isn't a phenomenon you'll ever encounter in nature, it makes Kelvin a pretty unappealing scale for everyday life.
And thus we started making shit up...
P.S. My bad Rankine also shakes hands with Kelvin about absolute zero, very demure, very mindful.
When most of the temperature scales were made, they didn't even know yet that there was a zero, I mean, theoretically, they likely knew or assumed. But they had no way of practically measuring it yet, at the very least.
I do think that as much as it would be weird for a couple of years, it would help a lot in the long run to widely adopt a temperature scale that starts at 0.
Because honestly, the percentage of adults I come across that have no idea how temperature works or what it even is conceptually beyond just "a nice day or a bad day" or "this is the number for cooking this thing" is astonishing.
Because honestly, the percentage of adults I come across that have no idea how temperature works
Just don't ask us to define entropy.
I think people kind of ruined entropy with all that disorder crap. The simple conceptual explanation is that entropy represents the energy that is unavailable to do work. The more entropy a system has the less work it's capable of doing, which ultimately means the less can happen within that system. Entropy always increases globally, because anything you do is something that happens and anything that happens means less energy available to make other things happen. The complex esoteric interpretations might have some conceptual value in specific circumstances, but like a lot of science communication the rigorous scientific definitions don't get communicated, so now we have nebulous concepts like order and disorder floating around that just confuse people more than anything.
I knew a girl years ago who thought that the temperatures on her oven must use a different scale than the temperature on her thermometer and whatnot. Because surely nothing could get to 500 degrees fahrenheit and not, like, melt the stove. It's gotta be a different scale.
You should add in programming languages with zero, null, empty, and the rest.
Good point 👍 concepts of "nothing" 😉