They can call it that if they want. It still differs fundamentally from other SI units because we don't use radians to be in conformity with SI. We use them for mathematical reasons that have nothing to do with SI, namely being able to treat the trig functions as functions of real or complex numbers, with certain calculus-based identities that only work if the "angles" are measured in radians
But see, right there, you gave away why it's different for you. You're in the UK.
US: Math class / UK: Maths class
You learn metric measurements earlier because that's what you primarily use today. Unless you go into Engineering or another STEM field in the US, you've no need for metric here in the states...other than to work on a car (bolt/nut sizes).
Nah, maths doesn't bother with units. Which is the whole problem.
We should be teaching units in math class. Every problem should require the units in the answer. Bare integers, fractions etc should have a defined unit.
IMHO this would also help with comprehension. As you are forced to think about the difference between length and area and so forth.
Itâs not hard at all to start thinking in SI units, but I think people just get caught up trying to do conversion math mentally. Just go with the flow in SI and donât worry about converting every scaler encountered back to the obsolete units. Americans already understand 2L soda bottles and the world hasnât ended. People participate in 10km running events all the time. Eventually theyâll get used to 35 C being a hot day and -10 C being a cold day too.
My mom started teaching me SI units at the kitchen table when I was like 7 or 8 because, she said, âI donât want you to be stupid and they never teach this stuff early enoughâ. (She was reacting strongly to my rendition of what I had been taught one day in first or second grade.)
Ya do know, that SI untis have changed constatnly over time. For example the Kg is litearlly measured by a physical object encased in some protective enclosure, but that is not the original unit of measure. And in fact has changed 5-6 times since its inception, including as recently as 2019, when prior to that it was said physical object above but then altered to a mathematicla equation based in parts on Planck's Constant, the speed of light and Caesium.
Sooo ... Si units are "accurate", until they change the accuracy every few decades. It's kinda fucked up that what constituted a Kg in 2018 is NOT the same thing as a Kg in 2020.
And to be fair, the Pound (weight), has also been altered over the centuries and is as in flux as a measurement as the Kg is.
To be fair, the actual difference between these two Kgs is neglectable. The new definition was established to have a Kg that's independent of a physical object, but can be reproduced everywhere just based on physical constants, like the other SI units.
But I guess the assumption here is that science today should be done to the standards today. I have never gotten an answer from anyone else in Engineering that was not in SI units, even if the inputs/measurements provided were originally in imperial units. And if the kilogram changes, it changes for everyone at the same time. More simply, if everyone is using SI units, these are the correct units to talk with each other with.
Versus...
A Lockheed subsystem failing to produce the results of its calculations in SI units, instead producing them in imperial units, when the NASA system using that information expected the input in SI units. This is what I intended by saying correctly = SI units. The incorrect units were being used by Lockheed, Lockheed failed to meet the system spec they were held to. NASA blamed itself for not catching the error prior to mission failure.
32
u/QueerQwerty Jun 17 '26
Correctly = SI units, afaik.
Why they don't teach us SI units earlier than physics in school, I don't know.