Editing 1643: Degrees

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 23: Line 23:
 
The title text indicates that Cueball's friend still wants to know whether the answer is in radians Fahrenheit or radians Celsius, which, despite being a silly way to express temperature, would actually enable the friend to get some meaning out of the reply. But this just takes Cueball back to the problem he failed to solve in the first place of choosing one scale in preference to the other, so suddenly he announces has to go and runs off without ever clarifying what he meant. This result is probably because he is afraid of being a bad friend according to his very last point regarding Fahrenheit: ''Valuing unit standardization over being helpful possibly makes me a bad friend.''
 
The title text indicates that Cueball's friend still wants to know whether the answer is in radians Fahrenheit or radians Celsius, which, despite being a silly way to express temperature, would actually enable the friend to get some meaning out of the reply. But this just takes Cueball back to the problem he failed to solve in the first place of choosing one scale in preference to the other, so suddenly he announces has to go and runs off without ever clarifying what he meant. This result is probably because he is afraid of being a bad friend according to his very last point regarding Fahrenheit: ''Valuing unit standardization over being helpful possibly makes me a bad friend.''
  
The answer Cueball gives of 0.173 radians corresponds to a geometric angle 9.91° (0.173 × <sup>360°</sup>/<sub>2π</sub>). If this were "radians Celsius" it would be 9.91&nbsp;°C corresponding to 49.8&nbsp;°F and if it were "radians Fahrenheit" it would be 9.91&nbsp;°F corresponding to -12.3&nbsp;°C. [http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/02/13/new-england-freezing-temperatures-valentines-day-weekend/ Given the temperatures] in {{w|Massachusetts}} (where Randall lives) when this comic came out, the day after Valentine's Day 2016, Cueball was probably giving his answer in radians Fahrenheit.
+
The answer Cueball gives of 0.173 radians corresponds to a geometric angle 9.91° (0.173 × <sup>360°</sup>/<sub>2π</sub>). If this were "radians Celsius" it would be 9.91&nbsp;°C corresponding to 49.8&nbsp;°F and if it were "radians Fahrenheit" it would be 9.91 °F corresponding to -12.3 °C. [http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/02/13/new-england-freezing-temperatures-valentines-day-weekend/ Given the temperatures] in {{w|Massachusetts}} (where Randall lives) when this comic came out, the day after Valentines day 2016, Cueball was probably giving his answer in radians Fahrenheit.
  
 
=== Cueball's reasoning ===
 
=== Cueball's reasoning ===
Line 41: Line 41:
  
 
====Degrees Fahrenheit====
 
====Degrees Fahrenheit====
;0&nbsp;°F to 100&nbsp;°F good match for temperature range in which most humans live
+
;0°F to 100°F good match for temperature range in which most humans live
:In the context of air temperature, 0&nbsp;°F and 100&nbsp;°F correspond to "just about as cold as it gets" and "just about as hot as it gets" in temperate zones, thereby making Fahrenheit a useful temperature scale for weather reporting where most people live. By contrast, in Celsius a range of common temperatures in temperate zones is -20&nbsp;°C to 40&nbsp;°C, which is a less intuitive range for those used to the Fahrenheit scale.
+
:In the context of air temperature, 0 °F and 100 °F correspond to "just about as cold as it gets" and "just about as hot as it gets" in temperate zones, thereby making Fahrenheit a useful temperature scale for weather reporting where most people live. By contrast, in Celsius a range of common temperatures in temperate zones is -20 °C to 40&nbsp;°C, which is a less intuitive range for those used to the Fahrenheit scale.
 
;Rounds more usefully (70's, 90's)
 
;Rounds more usefully (70's, 90's)
 
:An argument sometimes heard for the continued use of Fahrenheit temperatures is that each 10 degrees change is meaningful in how we feel the temperature. Thus, it is convenient to talk about the temperature being in the 70's today, or in the 90's, etc. Since the Celsius degrees are almost twice as large, a similar statement about the temperature being in the 20's or 30's is not as useful, unless more precision is added by using phrases like low 20's or high 30's. However, this seems likely to be more a matter of which scale you are used to using than anything inherent in one scale or the other.
 
:An argument sometimes heard for the continued use of Fahrenheit temperatures is that each 10 degrees change is meaningful in how we feel the temperature. Thus, it is convenient to talk about the temperature being in the 70's today, or in the 90's, etc. Since the Celsius degrees are almost twice as large, a similar statement about the temperature being in the 20's or 30's is not as useful, unless more precision is added by using phrases like low 20's or high 30's. However, this seems likely to be more a matter of which scale you are used to using than anything inherent in one scale or the other.

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)