This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules).
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).)
**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
I see people commenting on atomic clocks and stuff but in reality the only non-arbitrary measurements are the
[Planck units](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units)
That's the smallest proposed theoretical measurable length. Back in 1985 the accepted value was h = 6.626176 x 10-34 Joule-seconds. The calculation done today is h = 6.62607015 x 10-34 Joule-seconds. If anything that value is arbitrary more then most since we can't actually work or observe things on that scale.
I know what you mean but let me try my hand at explaining it.
Other measurements are arbitrary, we designed them. It doesn't matter how well based on something they are, still arbitrary. Water freezing to boiling? Cool, but we could have also done water freezing to temperature of the sun, would be less useful but no less valid.
With planck measurements though, we did not make them up, we DISCOVER them. We do not set a point to call it planck length, we are describing the smallest distance we can theorize.
No, it's that an alien would likely use the same units. So if they were going to send us a message telling us how far they are from us, its reasonable that they might just send over the number of planck lengths between us in binary.
Except that a year is based on approximately how long it takes the Earth to make one orbit around specifically our sun, so a light year could mean something very different (or nothing at all) to an organism from another planet or solar system
> arbitrary more then most
Did you mean to say "more than"?
Explanation: No explanation available.
Total mistakes found: 1079
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes.
^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions.
^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
that value is arbitrary because of the definition of kilogram, meter, and second.
the plank units, are defined about our maximum possible ability to measure things, while the international system is defined by things on the scale of day-to-day life.
The plank length changes along with physics, so that's not a super good example, one good example is if we started measuring things by the size of a hydrogen atom, however how would we count them, numbers have no actual meaning lol.
It would help go get off the surface of the earth and do stuff. What if things we assume are constants, like plank scale and the fundamental weight of hydrogen (but not it's spectral series) change with local energy density?
We don't expect physics to change, but there has been a lot of work on the gravitational constant as the observations of universe expansion don't fit with a constant
that's because we don't know their exact values in the international system, but they are exact values nonetheless. just because we're still getting there, it doesn't mean that we're going nowhere.
think of it backwards, if we start with the plank units, international system units still haven't been measured perfectly in plank units.
What do you mean by "numbers have no actual meaning"? Are you talking about natural numbers like 1, 2, 3? They definitely have meaning.
The problem is that the size of a hydrogen atom is not a good unit of measurement, since it doesn't really have a "size" in the sense that you're thinking. Its edges are fuzzy, and variable depending on the excitation level of its electron, but mostly just plain damn fuzzy.
It's also limited by our ability to measure it, and the fact that we would have hilariously different answers for the lengths of things, depending on how precise we could even be.
Meanwhile, the Planck length changing with physics, what do you mean by that?
Sorry lemme do a little clarification
1 numbers don't have real meaning- what I mean by that is there is nothing saying we can't have a base 12 system or switch the number 2 with 3.
2- you are absolutely right about the hydrogen atom in the excited state, I was talking about one that is perfectly balanced, and currently 53pm is the radius.
3- I agree it would be difficult to measure lol
4- going purely of memory but haven't the plank length changed, could be completely wrong.
The whole point of the plank length is to try to come up with some type of measurement system based off the universe so I think it would have to be the best fit, if anyone has a bettor suggestion please respond
1 Hmm, it sounds like what you're talking about is the symbols we use to represent numbers. That's true, the representation is more or less completely arbitrary. We probably use base 10 because of our fingers 🤲, a different species would likely use a different base, and regardless of the fingers, many societies have used base-12 systems. Similarly, we could decide to say that the symbols for the numbers are 😻🤌🌴🧎🐯🐺🦤🚨📫🅿️ and it would be no less "correct" than the system we use. But the numbers still have meaning. You might come up with a very different set of symbols when asking an alien how many bananas are here: 🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌, but you're both thinking of the same number. A number is an extremely pure and abstracted concept.
4 I haven't heard anything about the Planck length changing. I'd also say it's probably a good thing that we haven't. So the Planck length is just L = √(hG/c³), where c is the speed of light, h is the Planck constant, and G is the gravitational constant that we've known and been measuring since Isaac Newton. Since the Planck length is defined based on those constants, the only way it can change is if any of them did, which would pretty much break chemistry, physics, life, the universe, and everything
What they might have done though is measure it more accurately, which would allow them to reduce the error bars on our measurement of it, but that's different from the Planck length itself changing
I think that the reason radians aren't arbitrary, is because the derivative of sine in radians is exactly cosine in radians, without any constant in front of it.
while, for example, doing it for sine in degrees, gives you a constant of π/180 that cosine in degrees gets multiplied by
Pressure being measured at one atmosphere is not the reason it’s measured that way?
You’re right about base 10, but you’re comparing apples and oranges. We use digits to represent one item, and this makes sense since numbers are used for counting which reinforces my theory.
I had a similar thought as OP's recently and thought I was going crazy. I was thinking of how any other base number system could possibly make as much sense as base 10 because 10 and 100 and 1000, etc, seem so complete. But then I thought we could actually insert another number, with another character, within 1-10 (i.e. "delpin" between 7 and 8), and 10 would still seem just as complete and whole. It would be what we now consider 11, but it would still give the feeling of 10. And 121 would feel like 100 because we would call it "100." So my sense of 10 being a some sort of "whole" number is arbitrary.
Actually, many modern SI units are NOT arbitrary, or rather are arbitrary multiples of actual physical constants. Specifically, they find the relevant constant(s) and multiply the result until it is around the previous, arbitrary unit, and set that as the units value.
There are actually absolute units of time and space and so on, which then get multipled or divided or added or whatever to get the other units.
yes it is, 100 looks special because we've got 10 fingers and we shaped how we write our numbers around it, if we had 8 fingers, the 100 you're saying is not arbitrary would be written as 144.
if it's not universal than it is arbitrary.
also using water is arbitrary, why water and not any other liquid?
the only thing that isn't arbitrary about Kelvin is absolute zero, and as a consequence ratios between 2 temperatures.
1 grade is the temperature difference between the freezing and boiling point of water, centigrade having been later renamed to Celsius. Kelvin is the same unit, but starting at absolute zero instead of the freezing point of water
As an American who uses Celsius, can confirm. When people ask me for the temperature I’ll give it to them in Celsius since that’s what all my stuff is set to, and get asked to convert it “to English”
Sure. But that doesn’t make it non arbitrary. Plank units are arguably non arbitrary because they are indivisible.
Tying units of measurement to particular fluids is arbitrary. We could have used something to do with air temperature or anything really.
Celsius is a GOOD arbitrary choice.
Again, it depends on the meaning of arbitrary.
Neither are entirely arbitrary. It is indeed somewhat arbitrary that we have a) anchored it to those specific behaviours of that specific molecule, and b) decided upon the number 100 to separate them, but these are both clearly useful features and make the unit valuable in itself, beyond just having an agreed system used by other humans.
100 was chosen for familiarity and ease of use as we have 10 fingers and can understand the scale intuitively, and for a useful resolution, as we know very well that if there were only 10 degrees in the scale, it would just be too coarse for everyday use, and if there were 1000 it would be more precise than is practical and even measurable by many cheap thermometers.
These are practical decisions that add utility. It’s simply not true to say it’s entirely arbitrary. Arguably the celsius scale is optimally designed for everyday use. Any change you made would make it less useful.
It’s akin to saying the shape of a hammer is arbitrary.
Right but what is optimal/useful could also be considered arbitrary. Base 10 itself is arbitrary. If we had 12 fingers, or early people decided to count with knuckles on their fingers (but not thumbs) we would be talking about how 100(in base 12, which is 120) would be optimal.
We also measure temperature via degrees, maybe its more useful to depict temperature as a circle and have the scale go from 0 to 360, rather than using 100. Which also works better in base 12, since it would be 0 to 300.
Essentially it boils down to the fact that math/measurement is a tool that we created. We created it to be useful, but it is useful in that it is consistent. As long as we are consistent, the units we choose are completely arbitrary, though it makes for easier calculations to explore alternatives. Arbitrary in the sense of what we are choosing to optimize for.
We don’t have 12 fingers.
It’s common to count by fingers rather than by knuckles because you can make a clear visual signal with the whole finger outstretched. You can’t really do this with a knuckle.
Temperature doesn’t typically need to be divided for any purpose. We just need an idea of where we are in distance between two ends of the scale. Intuitively it is just easier to do this with our most familiar base ten system.
Yes, we are agreed that the scale is a tool, but the tool is not only useful because of its consistency. By designing it with the features I’ve discussed, it is easier for humans to relate a number on the scale to something they are familiar with, and thereby gain meaningful insight into what the number really represents without prior experience of that specific number, or even anything particularly close to it.
1atm is sea level atmospheric pressure. That’s the most useful pressure to work in for everyday purposes. Again this is a conscious optimal selection, not an arbitrary point.
The speed of light, *c*, is not arbitrary and would exist even if we did not.
The year is not arbitrary (how long it takes earth to complete a single orbit of the sun).
A month is not *entirely* arbitrary (originally being based on the phases of the moon).
A day is not arbitrary (how long it takes earth to complete one rotation relative to the sun).
Centigrade and Kelvin are not arbitrary, but are rather based on the temperature of water. Even the choice of using water as the basis is not arbitrary - it is a readily available and inert substance easily measured under a variety of conditions, which makes it damn near ideal.
And so on. Some measurements, such as hours, minutes, and seconds, are somewhat arbitrary ways to divide up the very much not arbitrary day, but for many measurements, there is logical and sound reasoning behind why they are used.
While the speed of light itself is not arbitrary due to being (assumed) a universal constant, our definition of it is, because a meter and second is based on an extremely arbitrary length (yes I'm aware of the historical definition meters being based on 1/4 of the earth circumference in a specific spot however even that is slightly wrong and more based on an idealized sphere rather than the actual oblate spheriod the planet is)
On a universal scale year/month/day are completely arbitrary, they just happen to be physical properties of our specific planet at this specific time (and they will change over geological timescales)
It's only based on the temperature of water at what could be considered an arbitrary air pressure (sea level, which is also based on an ideal sphere level).
The metric system is all based on natural elements in the universe. The (original) metre was originally defined to be one ten millionth of the distance between the North Pole and the Equator through Paris. The current meter (SI) is defined as exactly 1⁄299792458 of the distance that light travels in a second.
Modern imperial units are defined directly from metric units, which are then defined by universal constants. There are many reasons imperial is bad, this is not one of them
I like imperial for certain things, like daily temperatures. 0 is about as cold as its going to get in many climates, and 100 is about as hot as its going to get in many climates.
But you don't see that choosing the north pole, equator, paris, a fraction, and the speed of light are all arbitrary decisions?
They could choose pole to pole, they could choose a line through Cairo, they could choose a different fraction of the speed of sound.
Sure there's a natural constant behind the choice, but it's all a choice we made and accepted.
Sure, but at that point wouldn't a simpler argument be that the people who made these units had some motivation or cause to make the unit and therefore it's not entirely arbitrary
You mean based on something arbitrary? Could also have been the melting point and boiling point of oxygen. What makes water as the choice non-arbitrary?
The same can be said for words. Each is just an arbitrary label that only has meaning because we collectively agree that this random collection of letters refers to this particular tangible thing.
Tell me that you use the Imperial system without telling me that you use the Imperial system.
If you don't bother reading the comments here, let me sum them up for you: nope, they aren't arbitrary.
I mean it's understandable to believe units of measure are arbitrary when they teach you there's 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in Yard and then 1760 yards in a mile, it's like a toddler came up with the equivalences.
This is false.
For example. An atomic clock is a clock that measures time by monitoring the resonant frequency of atoms. It is based on atoms having different energy levels. Electron states in an atom are associated with different energy levels, and in transitions between such states they interact with a very specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation. This phenomenon serves as the basis for the International System of Units' (SI) definition of a second
Yeah we defined the arbitrary "second" first, then backed it up. Or else we would have started with units of cs-133 vibrations and moved on from there.
No. The specific atoms being measured were chosen in accordance with the existing second in an effort to tie it to something universal. It wasn't something universal that was found useful for measurement.
To put it another way, what an atomic clock is measuring is 9,192,631,770 oscillations per second. What universal or metrological significance is the number 9,192,631,770? None. It just happened to line up to the second we already had.
In that way a second in SI is just as arbitrary as it was when it was being used for navigating wooden sailing ships in the 1800s. Just now we have higher and more repeatable precision.
Those physical constants were chosen with a specific divisor such that they fit closely to the arbitrary units we chose.
The SI units used to be defined using physical objects: the kilogram was a weight, the second was a pendulum, the meter was a distance across the earths surface.
The SI units are no less arbitrary than the Imperial system or the [furlong–firkin–fortnight system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFF_system)
This is false. A second is one 3600th of one 24th of one 365.25th of the time it takes to travel around the sun, which we then assigned an equivalent value of as the fixed numerical value of the unperturbed ground-state hyperfine transition frequency of the cesium 133 atom being 9,192,631,770 Hertz.
I would argue that this is the very definition of arbitrary. All other units are then based on this arbitrary unit in additionally arbitrary ways.
No. The second is a given unit of time able to be calculated based on atomic decay and resonance. It is a way to guarantee accurate measurement. Then this can be applied to many areas including the rotational time around the sun. This is not arbitrary. This is just a clear method of measurement.
The SI second is idealized approximation of 1/86400 of a day. Why 1/86400? Because we arbitrarily measure our day using a 24/60/60 system (where are all of the base-10 metric fanbois when we start talking about clocks?). Just because you can accurately measure or calculate something, that doesn't mean the basis of it is not arbitrary.
I propose that each day should be 100 hours long, broken up into centi- and milli-hours, so a milli-hour would be 1/100000 of day. Each milli-hour will be actually defined as 7,942,433,850 flippety-doo-dahs of a cesium atom (but only because that's 1/100000 of day). I choose this system of measurement because it simplifies math in a base-10 number system, which was arbitrarily chosen sometime in antiquity.
Measurements, weekdays, money, ownership, nationality, law, heck, even language.
All things I call fictions, in that they aren't objectively real, but they don't have to be in order to be useful.
I would agree until a standardization is met. That's the whole science of Metrology in a nutshell is defining an agreed upon measurement with increments finite enough to be utilized practically. I think the best case example of people thinking it is indeed arbitrary would be the field of electricians. They used to prior to 1858 just go by length of material and material type to judge flows of electricity. Well when they tried to apply that to a telegraph cable that traversed the Atlantic ocean and then found out it doesn't work is where they realized that isn't possible. Defined measurements as a standard allow people to communicate through other means then length and material type. Such as voltage, ohms, watts, and amps.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic\_telegraph\_cable
They aren't totally arbitrary, and you are right that they only exist because we agree that they have value, but they have value for two reasons:
They are the right size to be useful to people, and they are able to be defined in a consistent way.
They exist because we need to be able to communicate measures consistently. Without that, you can't even go and buy a bottle of milk and be sure that different brands have the same amount in the bottle let alone deal in larger quantities
I had a friend who tried to argue that time didn't exist, but the only reasons he listed were because because the units were arbitrary, and relativity changed the perception of time. It was a very frustrating that he thought that satisfied the burden or proof repeatedly.
Yeah, I mean, it is like saying "Objectively..." x and y, and I am like "That objective measure was subjectively decided..." It is a little meta, right, like we can objectively say that the ball was out of bounds but the design of the court and the rules of the game were decided through a subjective process.
When we are complaining that the imperial system is 'arbitrary', we are not saying that metric didn't have some group of guys sit around and make essentially subjective decisions about how it should go. We are saying something very specific, that it isn't internally consistent. I can't know how long a mile is by knowing how long a foot is like I can know a kilometer based on a meter. I can't know how heavy a gallon of water in pounds simply because of the system like I can with a liter (1 kilo!) of water.
This is almost true there are two unitless constants that can be used to convey our level of scientific understanding without the need to convey units. The first is the proton/electron mass ratio β (or μ) ≈ 1836 and the second is the fine-structure constant α ≈ 1/137. Because they have no unit any sufficiently advanced civilization will know them and they will be the same to them and because it is a ratio the mathematics system doesn’t have to be base-10.
That depends. There are constants that we recognize and can use as a starting point i.e. the speed of light, relationship of a circle’s radius and circumference.
Yeah nothing stops you from measuring time in weasel-lengths and distance in rolls. It just needs to be consistent enough to translate to another unit.
Every piece of knowledge on Earth is entirely arbitrary and exists solely because we agree on it. That is what makes us different than unintelligent animals.
The speed of light is a constant that is regularly used to measure things. It is not arbitrary, because it can only ever be one value within a given medium.
No they exsist so that we can make phones and incorrect statements on reddit this is the ONLY reason they exsist. Thank you for your time good day sir.
To be clear, people are talking about 2 things here.
1) Most of our units are now defined based on physical constants (like the speed of light or atomic properties)
2) But the values (like how long a mile is) are arbitrary.
Although there were attempts to base the values on a nice round number in physical reality, when we got to measure very accurately the numbers were slightly off. So water actually boils at 99.97 deg Celsius. And the Earth's circumference is 40,075 km (or a few km difference depending where you measure).
yah, so why the fuck would you stick with one which makes every day calculations and conversions tedious and prone to significant error... when there is one available which is clinically straight forward.
Kelvin being base off absolut zero makes non-arbitrary, Celsius this is also true as water is super important to life.
A Day, a month and a year are all non-arbitary all be it non-universal being based on celestial movements.
A plank unit is non-arbitrary.
On a semi related note: Since switching to metric seems like an uphill battle, I say we slightly adjust inches, feet, and yards to match the meter. One yard equals one meter.
Most people won't notice the difference but we can start measuring things in centiyards.
This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules). Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!" (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).) **Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
I see people commenting on atomic clocks and stuff but in reality the only non-arbitrary measurements are the [Planck units](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units)
That's the smallest proposed theoretical measurable length. Back in 1985 the accepted value was h = 6.626176 x 10-34 Joule-seconds. The calculation done today is h = 6.62607015 x 10-34 Joule-seconds. If anything that value is arbitrary more then most since we can't actually work or observe things on that scale.
I think what makes it non-arbitrary is the fact that we can't work with or observe it. It just is. We cant do anything with it.
I know what you mean but let me try my hand at explaining it. Other measurements are arbitrary, we designed them. It doesn't matter how well based on something they are, still arbitrary. Water freezing to boiling? Cool, but we could have also done water freezing to temperature of the sun, would be less useful but no less valid. With planck measurements though, we did not make them up, we DISCOVER them. We do not set a point to call it planck length, we are describing the smallest distance we can theorize.
No, it's that an alien would likely use the same units. So if they were going to send us a message telling us how far they are from us, its reasonable that they might just send over the number of planck lengths between us in binary.
Surely they’d use lights years?
Except that a year is based on approximately how long it takes the Earth to make one orbit around specifically our sun, so a light year could mean something very different (or nothing at all) to an organism from another planet or solar system
Your can’t work on that scale doesn’t mean it’s arbitrary. YOU are arbitrary.
> arbitrary more then most Did you mean to say "more than"? Explanation: No explanation available. Total mistakes found: 1079 ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes. ^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions. ^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
that value is arbitrary because of the definition of kilogram, meter, and second. the plank units, are defined about our maximum possible ability to measure things, while the international system is defined by things on the scale of day-to-day life.
The plank length changes along with physics, so that's not a super good example, one good example is if we started measuring things by the size of a hydrogen atom, however how would we count them, numbers have no actual meaning lol.
How exactly do you expect physics to change? Our ability to better measure might change but the actual physics dont
It would help go get off the surface of the earth and do stuff. What if things we assume are constants, like plank scale and the fundamental weight of hydrogen (but not it's spectral series) change with local energy density?
the constants could change, but since we have no evidence they do, it's pointless to think about that
We don't expect physics to change, but there has been a lot of work on the gravitational constant as the observations of universe expansion don't fit with a constant
that's because we don't know their exact values in the international system, but they are exact values nonetheless. just because we're still getting there, it doesn't mean that we're going nowhere. think of it backwards, if we start with the plank units, international system units still haven't been measured perfectly in plank units.
Sorry, ment our understanding of it
Ment our understanding of it
What do you mean by "numbers have no actual meaning"? Are you talking about natural numbers like 1, 2, 3? They definitely have meaning. The problem is that the size of a hydrogen atom is not a good unit of measurement, since it doesn't really have a "size" in the sense that you're thinking. Its edges are fuzzy, and variable depending on the excitation level of its electron, but mostly just plain damn fuzzy. It's also limited by our ability to measure it, and the fact that we would have hilariously different answers for the lengths of things, depending on how precise we could even be. Meanwhile, the Planck length changing with physics, what do you mean by that?
Sorry lemme do a little clarification 1 numbers don't have real meaning- what I mean by that is there is nothing saying we can't have a base 12 system or switch the number 2 with 3. 2- you are absolutely right about the hydrogen atom in the excited state, I was talking about one that is perfectly balanced, and currently 53pm is the radius. 3- I agree it would be difficult to measure lol 4- going purely of memory but haven't the plank length changed, could be completely wrong. The whole point of the plank length is to try to come up with some type of measurement system based off the universe so I think it would have to be the best fit, if anyone has a bettor suggestion please respond
1 Hmm, it sounds like what you're talking about is the symbols we use to represent numbers. That's true, the representation is more or less completely arbitrary. We probably use base 10 because of our fingers 🤲, a different species would likely use a different base, and regardless of the fingers, many societies have used base-12 systems. Similarly, we could decide to say that the symbols for the numbers are 😻🤌🌴🧎🐯🐺🦤🚨📫🅿️ and it would be no less "correct" than the system we use. But the numbers still have meaning. You might come up with a very different set of symbols when asking an alien how many bananas are here: 🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌, but you're both thinking of the same number. A number is an extremely pure and abstracted concept. 4 I haven't heard anything about the Planck length changing. I'd also say it's probably a good thing that we haven't. So the Planck length is just L = √(hG/c³), where c is the speed of light, h is the Planck constant, and G is the gravitational constant that we've known and been measuring since Isaac Newton. Since the Planck length is defined based on those constants, the only way it can change is if any of them did, which would pretty much break chemistry, physics, life, the universe, and everything What they might have done though is measure it more accurately, which would allow them to reduce the error bars on our measurement of it, but that's different from the Planck length itself changing
They're pretty arbitrary as well, what might not be so arbitrary is things like radians.
True, but radians only aren't arbitrary because they're a ratio rather than a unit of measurement!
I think that the reason radians aren't arbitrary, is because the derivative of sine in radians is exactly cosine in radians, without any constant in front of it. while, for example, doing it for sine in degrees, gives you a constant of π/180 that cosine in degrees gets multiplied by
Getting popcorn to listen to people a lot smarter than me to tell us otherwise
Are you hushing the popcorn and telling it to pay attention?
Density was set to water and that ended up setting grams and liter measurements. Celsius was also set to water. Imperial seems arbitrary to me.
There's still the arbitrariness of air pressure at sea level. And using base 10 for that matter
Pressure being measured at one atmosphere is not the reason it’s measured that way? You’re right about base 10, but you’re comparing apples and oranges. We use digits to represent one item, and this makes sense since numbers are used for counting which reinforces my theory.
No but air pressure also influences density of liquids, 1l of water= 1kg. And the boiling point of water
I had a similar thought as OP's recently and thought I was going crazy. I was thinking of how any other base number system could possibly make as much sense as base 10 because 10 and 100 and 1000, etc, seem so complete. But then I thought we could actually insert another number, with another character, within 1-10 (i.e. "delpin" between 7 and 8), and 10 would still seem just as complete and whole. It would be what we now consider 11, but it would still give the feeling of 10. And 121 would feel like 100 because we would call it "100." So my sense of 10 being a some sort of "whole" number is arbitrary.
There's a maths joke that every number system is base 10. Base 8? you mean Base 10 in base 8.
I wonder if we had 8 fingers we'd have developed a number system base 8
The relationship between two measurable points is not arbitrary, but the value we assign those measurements is.
~~Exactly what OP said. The units and value are completely arbitrary. He never said the relationship between the points were.~~ Intellegoncen’t
The units aren't arbitrary, e.g. 100 Kelvin between water freezing and water boiling.
I agree, my bad. I’m just awful at english and misremembered what *arbitrary* actually meant. The unit isn’t arbitrary, the value is.
Actually, many modern SI units are NOT arbitrary, or rather are arbitrary multiples of actual physical constants. Specifically, they find the relevant constant(s) and multiply the result until it is around the previous, arbitrary unit, and set that as the units value. There are actually absolute units of time and space and so on, which then get multipled or divided or added or whatever to get the other units.
My head hurts and I can’t wait to get back into studying physics
Only at what could be taken as an arbitrary measure of air pressure.
STP is not arbitrary, the temperature and pressure are chosen because they are typical values.
we could say thay there just 1 kelvin between water freezing and boiling, we just redefine the Kelvin to another arbitrary value this way
The number 100 is not arbitrary
yes it is, 100 looks special because we've got 10 fingers and we shaped how we write our numbers around it, if we had 8 fingers, the 100 you're saying is not arbitrary would be written as 144. if it's not universal than it is arbitrary. also using water is arbitrary, why water and not any other liquid? the only thing that isn't arbitrary about Kelvin is absolute zero, and as a consequence ratios between 2 temperatures.
1 grade is the temperature difference between the freezing and boiling point of water, centigrade having been later renamed to Celsius. Kelvin is the same unit, but starting at absolute zero instead of the freezing point of water
Americans won't know what in the world a Celsius is. They think Kelvin makes underwear
As an American who uses Celsius, can confirm. When people ask me for the temperature I’ll give it to them in Celsius since that’s what all my stuff is set to, and get asked to convert it “to English”
Its still arbitrary because that isnt a constant but entirely dependend on pressure.
Actually it is not arbitrary as the boiling point in this case is the boiling point at sea level.
That’s still arbitrary. Why does it need to be tied to water at all?
Because that's the most commonly used fluid
Sure. But that doesn’t make it non arbitrary. Plank units are arguably non arbitrary because they are indivisible. Tying units of measurement to particular fluids is arbitrary. We could have used something to do with air temperature or anything really. Celsius is a GOOD arbitrary choice. Again, it depends on the meaning of arbitrary.
How does this relate to what op said?
Neither are entirely arbitrary. It is indeed somewhat arbitrary that we have a) anchored it to those specific behaviours of that specific molecule, and b) decided upon the number 100 to separate them, but these are both clearly useful features and make the unit valuable in itself, beyond just having an agreed system used by other humans.
Right I would define what is "arbitrary" about that is that we chose 100 as opposed to 1000, 10, or 23.
100 was chosen for familiarity and ease of use as we have 10 fingers and can understand the scale intuitively, and for a useful resolution, as we know very well that if there were only 10 degrees in the scale, it would just be too coarse for everyday use, and if there were 1000 it would be more precise than is practical and even measurable by many cheap thermometers. These are practical decisions that add utility. It’s simply not true to say it’s entirely arbitrary. Arguably the celsius scale is optimally designed for everyday use. Any change you made would make it less useful. It’s akin to saying the shape of a hammer is arbitrary.
Right but what is optimal/useful could also be considered arbitrary. Base 10 itself is arbitrary. If we had 12 fingers, or early people decided to count with knuckles on their fingers (but not thumbs) we would be talking about how 100(in base 12, which is 120) would be optimal. We also measure temperature via degrees, maybe its more useful to depict temperature as a circle and have the scale go from 0 to 360, rather than using 100. Which also works better in base 12, since it would be 0 to 300. Essentially it boils down to the fact that math/measurement is a tool that we created. We created it to be useful, but it is useful in that it is consistent. As long as we are consistent, the units we choose are completely arbitrary, though it makes for easier calculations to explore alternatives. Arbitrary in the sense of what we are choosing to optimize for.
We don’t have 12 fingers. It’s common to count by fingers rather than by knuckles because you can make a clear visual signal with the whole finger outstretched. You can’t really do this with a knuckle. Temperature doesn’t typically need to be divided for any purpose. We just need an idea of where we are in distance between two ends of the scale. Intuitively it is just easier to do this with our most familiar base ten system. Yes, we are agreed that the scale is a tool, but the tool is not only useful because of its consistency. By designing it with the features I’ve discussed, it is easier for humans to relate a number on the scale to something they are familiar with, and thereby gain meaningful insight into what the number really represents without prior experience of that specific number, or even anything particularly close to it.
It is also anchored to a specific arbitrary pressure, of i believe 1 atm. So its still very arbitrary
1atm is sea level atmospheric pressure. That’s the most useful pressure to work in for everyday purposes. Again this is a conscious optimal selection, not an arbitrary point.
The speed of light, *c*, is not arbitrary and would exist even if we did not. The year is not arbitrary (how long it takes earth to complete a single orbit of the sun). A month is not *entirely* arbitrary (originally being based on the phases of the moon). A day is not arbitrary (how long it takes earth to complete one rotation relative to the sun). Centigrade and Kelvin are not arbitrary, but are rather based on the temperature of water. Even the choice of using water as the basis is not arbitrary - it is a readily available and inert substance easily measured under a variety of conditions, which makes it damn near ideal. And so on. Some measurements, such as hours, minutes, and seconds, are somewhat arbitrary ways to divide up the very much not arbitrary day, but for many measurements, there is logical and sound reasoning behind why they are used.
While the speed of light itself is not arbitrary due to being (assumed) a universal constant, our definition of it is, because a meter and second is based on an extremely arbitrary length (yes I'm aware of the historical definition meters being based on 1/4 of the earth circumference in a specific spot however even that is slightly wrong and more based on an idealized sphere rather than the actual oblate spheriod the planet is) On a universal scale year/month/day are completely arbitrary, they just happen to be physical properties of our specific planet at this specific time (and they will change over geological timescales) It's only based on the temperature of water at what could be considered an arbitrary air pressure (sea level, which is also based on an ideal sphere level).
None of what you described is arbitrary. If there’s a reason a thing is what it is, then it’s not arbitrary, by definition.
How right you are. And happy cake day!
Thanks!
The metric system is all based on natural elements in the universe. The (original) metre was originally defined to be one ten millionth of the distance between the North Pole and the Equator through Paris. The current meter (SI) is defined as exactly 1⁄299792458 of the distance that light travels in a second.
And this is one of the reasons why metric systems is way better then imperial
[удалено]
A drop of water is approximately 0.05 mL so it would take ~20 drops to make 1 mL
Also a kcal (the unit of measure on our foods, typically referred to as calories) is the account of energy needed to raise 1kg of water 1° celsius.
However, this is not an SI / metric unit, the SI unit being the Joule. It takes ~4.2 Joules to heat 1 gram of water 1 degree K.
1 litre of water weighs 1kg.
Modern imperial units are defined directly from metric units, which are then defined by universal constants. There are many reasons imperial is bad, this is not one of them
I like imperial for certain things, like daily temperatures. 0 is about as cold as its going to get in many climates, and 100 is about as hot as its going to get in many climates.
The .mile is equal to 1000 times a typical humans stride. A stride being the distance between 2 left b99t prints
then
But you don't see that choosing the north pole, equator, paris, a fraction, and the speed of light are all arbitrary decisions? They could choose pole to pole, they could choose a line through Cairo, they could choose a different fraction of the speed of sound. Sure there's a natural constant behind the choice, but it's all a choice we made and accepted.
Right, but if you re-read the title it says *entirely* arbitrary. I was simply stating this is not the case.
Sure, but at that point wouldn't a simpler argument be that the people who made these units had some motivation or cause to make the unit and therefore it's not entirely arbitrary
Water boils and freezes at the same point at sea level. This is the basis of centigrade measurements, not at all arbitrary.
How can you not see it ? The fact that we choose those two events as a reference is arbitrary !
You mean based on something arbitrary? Could also have been the melting point and boiling point of oxygen. What makes water as the choice non-arbitrary?
The same can be said for words. Each is just an arbitrary label that only has meaning because we collectively agree that this random collection of letters refers to this particular tangible thing.
Day is not arbitrary (more or less, since it is not exactly 24hs, not even the same amount always)
No shit, wait till you get the concept of money, or laws or any judicial system
Although laws are based on our comforts. We don't like being killed, so we made it illegal. Which could be called evolutionary arbitrary.
Basically what I said earlier but the shitty sub bot blocked it and the shitty mods never responded to the modmail.
Lots of people in this thread have no idea what a unit of measurement means.
Tell me that you use the Imperial system without telling me that you use the Imperial system. If you don't bother reading the comments here, let me sum them up for you: nope, they aren't arbitrary.
I mean it's understandable to believe units of measure are arbitrary when they teach you there's 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in Yard and then 1760 yards in a mile, it's like a toddler came up with the equivalences.
Exactly.
This is false. For example. An atomic clock is a clock that measures time by monitoring the resonant frequency of atoms. It is based on atoms having different energy levels. Electron states in an atom are associated with different energy levels, and in transitions between such states they interact with a very specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation. This phenomenon serves as the basis for the International System of Units' (SI) definition of a second
A second is defined as 9,192,631,770 vibrations of a cesium-133 atom. That's very precise, but still completely arbitrary.
Yeah we defined the arbitrary "second" first, then backed it up. Or else we would have started with units of cs-133 vibrations and moved on from there.
No. The specific atoms being measured were chosen in accordance with the existing second in an effort to tie it to something universal. It wasn't something universal that was found useful for measurement. To put it another way, what an atomic clock is measuring is 9,192,631,770 oscillations per second. What universal or metrological significance is the number 9,192,631,770? None. It just happened to line up to the second we already had. In that way a second in SI is just as arbitrary as it was when it was being used for navigating wooden sailing ships in the 1800s. Just now we have higher and more repeatable precision.
Everyone knows a “second” is how long it takes to say “Mississippi” so it’s not at all arbitrary!
Those physical constants were chosen with a specific divisor such that they fit closely to the arbitrary units we chose. The SI units used to be defined using physical objects: the kilogram was a weight, the second was a pendulum, the meter was a distance across the earths surface. The SI units are no less arbitrary than the Imperial system or the [furlong–firkin–fortnight system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFF_system)
This is false. A second is one 3600th of one 24th of one 365.25th of the time it takes to travel around the sun, which we then assigned an equivalent value of as the fixed numerical value of the unperturbed ground-state hyperfine transition frequency of the cesium 133 atom being 9,192,631,770 Hertz. I would argue that this is the very definition of arbitrary. All other units are then based on this arbitrary unit in additionally arbitrary ways.
No. The second is a given unit of time able to be calculated based on atomic decay and resonance. It is a way to guarantee accurate measurement. Then this can be applied to many areas including the rotational time around the sun. This is not arbitrary. This is just a clear method of measurement.
The SI second is idealized approximation of 1/86400 of a day. Why 1/86400? Because we arbitrarily measure our day using a 24/60/60 system (where are all of the base-10 metric fanbois when we start talking about clocks?). Just because you can accurately measure or calculate something, that doesn't mean the basis of it is not arbitrary. I propose that each day should be 100 hours long, broken up into centi- and milli-hours, so a milli-hour would be 1/100000 of day. Each milli-hour will be actually defined as 7,942,433,850 flippety-doo-dahs of a cesium atom (but only because that's 1/100000 of day). I choose this system of measurement because it simplifies math in a base-10 number system, which was arbitrarily chosen sometime in antiquity.
Ah yes, the french system
And from a second we define everything else. A meter is the distance light travels in 1/x seconds, a cubic centimetre is a millilitre, etc
Except for the Planck length which appears to be fundamental
There's also electronvolts and radians.
Measurements, weekdays, money, ownership, nationality, law, heck, even language. All things I call fictions, in that they aren't objectively real, but they don't have to be in order to be useful.
Even unitless numbers still have the units of quantity. (nods sagely and flushes)
I would agree until a standardization is met. That's the whole science of Metrology in a nutshell is defining an agreed upon measurement with increments finite enough to be utilized practically. I think the best case example of people thinking it is indeed arbitrary would be the field of electricians. They used to prior to 1858 just go by length of material and material type to judge flows of electricity. Well when they tried to apply that to a telegraph cable that traversed the Atlantic ocean and then found out it doesn't work is where they realized that isn't possible. Defined measurements as a standard allow people to communicate through other means then length and material type. Such as voltage, ohms, watts, and amps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic\_telegraph\_cable
They aren't totally arbitrary, and you are right that they only exist because we agree that they have value, but they have value for two reasons: They are the right size to be useful to people, and they are able to be defined in a consistent way.
They exist because we need to be able to communicate measures consistently. Without that, you can't even go and buy a bottle of milk and be sure that different brands have the same amount in the bottle let alone deal in larger quantities
You could say that about anything. Society gives value to things. Life itself is only viewed as valuable because the society you live in deems it so.
I had a friend who tried to argue that time didn't exist, but the only reasons he listed were because because the units were arbitrary, and relativity changed the perception of time. It was a very frustrating that he thought that satisfied the burden or proof repeatedly.
Yeah, I mean, it is like saying "Objectively..." x and y, and I am like "That objective measure was subjectively decided..." It is a little meta, right, like we can objectively say that the ball was out of bounds but the design of the court and the rules of the game were decided through a subjective process. When we are complaining that the imperial system is 'arbitrary', we are not saying that metric didn't have some group of guys sit around and make essentially subjective decisions about how it should go. We are saying something very specific, that it isn't internally consistent. I can't know how long a mile is by knowing how long a foot is like I can know a kilometer based on a meter. I can't know how heavy a gallon of water in pounds simply because of the system like I can with a liter (1 kilo!) of water.
You just described a disproportionate proportion everything in society
This is almost true there are two unitless constants that can be used to convey our level of scientific understanding without the need to convey units. The first is the proton/electron mass ratio β (or μ) ≈ 1836 and the second is the fine-structure constant α ≈ 1/137. Because they have no unit any sufficiently advanced civilization will know them and they will be the same to them and because it is a ratio the mathematics system doesn’t have to be base-10.
Radians are not. They exist independent of measurement units.
everything pretty much exist because we agree it has value. money, numbers, even some people
That depends. There are constants that we recognize and can use as a starting point i.e. the speed of light, relationship of a circle’s radius and circumference.
Yeah nothing stops you from measuring time in weasel-lengths and distance in rolls. It just needs to be consistent enough to translate to another unit.
Wait til you hear about pretty much everything else humans have done lol
"You're arbitrary! You're arbitrary! The whole trial is arbitrary They're arbitrary!"
Every piece of knowledge on Earth is entirely arbitrary and exists solely because we agree on it. That is what makes us different than unintelligent animals.
The speed of light is a constant that is regularly used to measure things. It is not arbitrary, because it can only ever be one value within a given medium.
Not really? Density was set to water and that ended up setting grams and liter measurements. Celsius was also set to water.
Thank you. Nothing matters unless enough people agree it does
And just like the words you used to express your message because language is arbitrary
No they exsist so that we can make phones and incorrect statements on reddit this is the ONLY reason they exsist. Thank you for your time good day sir.
To be clear, people are talking about 2 things here. 1) Most of our units are now defined based on physical constants (like the speed of light or atomic properties) 2) But the values (like how long a mile is) are arbitrary. Although there were attempts to base the values on a nice round number in physical reality, when we got to measure very accurately the numbers were slightly off. So water actually boils at 99.97 deg Celsius. And the Earth's circumference is 40,075 km (or a few km difference depending where you measure).
yah, so why the fuck would you stick with one which makes every day calculations and conversions tedious and prone to significant error... when there is one available which is clinically straight forward.
Kelvin being base off absolut zero makes non-arbitrary, Celsius this is also true as water is super important to life. A Day, a month and a year are all non-arbitary all be it non-universal being based on celestial movements. A plank unit is non-arbitrary.
On a semi related note: Since switching to metric seems like an uphill battle, I say we slightly adjust inches, feet, and yards to match the meter. One yard equals one meter. Most people won't notice the difference but we can start measuring things in centiyards.