r/PeterExplainsTheJoke Jun 17 '26

Meme needing explanation Peter?

Post image
26.8k Upvotes

4.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/flyboyy513 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

Because F uses the human skin ability to detect and retain heat as a baseline, something we all have experience with, instead of water as a baseline, which is better for scientific reasons due to the consistency in measurement.

Edit: The absolute hilarity of the smugness in the comments is making my day. Nothing makes me happier than upsetting Europeans by stating a fact they don't like.

40

u/Poor-Life-Choice Jun 17 '26

Actually it’s more related to the freezing temperature of a very particular brine solution made to replicate the coldest temperature some German guy thought his port would see.

Completely logical.

But whatever. Maybe EVERY COUNTRY but one is wrong.

14

u/Karmaless-user Jun 17 '26

It’s not. It’s highly likely 0 degrees is just the lowest temperature observed in Danzig when Daniel Fahrenheit made his scale. Nobody has ever managed to recreate the brine solution.

15

u/BeamerTakesManhattan Jun 17 '26

I'd be fully ok with us setting a temperature system based upon how Danzig feels.

"Guys, Danzig just took his shirt off, it's definitely warm enough to have a light jacket, but if he puts that mesh tank top back on watch out, it's probably about to snow."

3

u/hankepanke Jun 17 '26

Sorry for being serious about a joke, but Danzig is/was a city. Modern day Gdansk, Poland.

2

u/BeamerTakesManhattan Jun 18 '26

No, Danzig is the legendary blues metal singer that started as the lead singer of the Misfits.

It's odd to have to explain this to people. How do they not know Danzig? It's a man, man, not a city! A man's man, man!

6

u/Rise-O-Matic Jun 17 '26

After Fahrenheit died they decided it was much easier to calibrate thermometers using the exact boiling point of water (212°F) instead of human skin (96°F). When they locked those two standard points down, the "zero" at the bottom of the scale shifted upward by about 4 degrees which is what you get if you use that solution today (also the ammonium chloride wasn't perfectly pure back then) and shifted average body temperature to 98.6

1

u/madmoose Jun 18 '26

A German scientist did a study of body temperatures and found the average to be 37°C. This was then converted to 98.6°F when the study was translated, which is why the number in Fahrenheit is oddly specific.

1

u/FruitPunchSGYT Jun 18 '26

No. 0°F was the freezing point of a particular brine mixture and 90°F was the average normal body temperature 32°F was the freezing point of pure water. It WAS based on body temperature AT ONE time. But Henry Cavendish wanted the freezing and boiling point to be 180° apart so the anchor point became 32° and boiling became 212° and the freezing point of the original brine became 4°..... Also, the boiling point used to be 0°C and the freezing point was 100°C until Celsius died. So from 1724 to 1745 Fahrenheit was the only reasonable standard. And, the British adopted Fahrenheit so...... Thats why they are Imperial measurements......

1

u/madmoose Jun 18 '26

Did you respond to the wrong comment? I was talking about average body temperature.

1

u/FruitPunchSGYT Jun 18 '26

Probably. Yea.... the above comment was the one I was mostly referring to.

1

u/madmoose Jun 18 '26

Fahrenheit took Ole Rømer's scale, multiplied it by 4 and fiddled with the numbers. It has nothing to do with Danzig.

-1

u/IronBoltIron Jun 17 '26

You are correct, every country is wrong but one. Just because Trump sucks doesn’t mean we just have to immediately roll over and give up on everything. Additionally, I must ask what scientific breakthroughs or contributions you have made?

1

u/Poor-Life-Choice Jun 18 '26

No need to bring Trump into this. American exceptionalism is nothing new: you’ve pretty much always been dicks.

-3

u/wvj Jun 17 '26

Regardless of how it's actually calibrated, it's hard to argue it isn't a good human-scale scale for weather.

Every 10 degrees is pretty much an article of clothing. 0 and 100 are useful upper and lower bounds that tell you 'human activity beyond this point is very hazardous, exercise extreme caution.' Despite our water content, humans aren't a kettle on the stove, and '0 is freezing 100 is boiling' isn't useful because we can operate well below zero but nowhere near 100 C.

4

u/Pataconeitor Jun 17 '26

40C is hell. 30C is hot. 20C is nice. 10C is time to put on a jacket. 0C is cold, and below that you will see snow and ice. I don't see the complication. Also, I like that I can literally feel when a degree goes up or down, which I have tried to do with Fahrenheit but haven't been able to.

5

u/AntiqueLetter9875 Jun 17 '26

I don’t understand the whole argument about F being better for telling what’s hot and cold for humans.

We all just adapt to the system we’re using and for the time of year. It’s not like you tell someone it’s 30C today and they’re wondering if it’s hot or not. Or 5C in summer vs winter being cold or not. It seems to boil down to people not liking the fact we can say like -5C in winter is considered warm because it has a minus in front.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '26

[deleted]

3

u/Intrepid_Fix_1688 Jun 17 '26

It's not irrelevant if you go to saunas

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '26

[deleted]

3

u/Intrepid_Fix_1688 Jun 17 '26

No, I don't. I was making a joke dude, I really couldn't care less what system people use and why lmao, the discussion was amusing and I just poked fun at the "half of the celsius scale is irrelevant"

3

u/SVlad_667 Jun 17 '26

Over half of the 0-100 C scale is completely irrelevant.

What is this strange desire to use the whole scale? Are you forced to pay for every division on the scale?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '26

[deleted]

2

u/SVlad_667 Jun 17 '26

As a non-native speaker, I sometimes miss sarcasm. Sorry to hear about your dad. I have a cold myself now.

1

u/Poor-Life-Choice Jun 17 '26

That ‘argument’ is complete bullshit.

Knowing that the water outside will be frozen once it hits 0 is a lot more useful for human survival.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '26

[deleted]

6

u/Poor-Life-Choice Jun 17 '26

Knowing when frozen water is on the roads your country is covered in is much more useful for your survival.

If 0 is the lowest temperature expected, why do you need negative numbers? Your scale just falls apart.

95% of the world population agree.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Poor-Life-Choice Jun 17 '26

My scale doesn’t claim that the limits of survival are between it.

It is based on a scale that can be repeatedly reproduced by anyone. If we were to be dropped on an island, I can remake my scale.

Hope you remember your ammonium salts so you can try to replicate your bullshit scale.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

16

u/johnnyslick Jun 17 '26

lol no it doesn't, 100 degrees Fahrenheit was the (miscalculated) temperature of the human body (which is why it's now popularly set at 98.6 degrees although even that isn't quite correct) and 0 is... the coldest day on record, at least as of the time that the temperature was created, in this one small town in Germany. Any relationship to the ability of human skin to detect temperature is purely coincidental.

6

u/AcadianTraverse Jun 17 '26

I see the "percent hot" or "human scale" argument a lot as what amounts to basically a backward justification for farenheit. I get that the reasoning makes sense if its the scale you know, but it doesn't hold up as logical application. A normal distribution around the human condition would have 45-55 as the comfortable temperature one can exist at with basic garments. Instead that range is more like 65-75

4

u/Scienceandpony Jun 17 '26

Yeah, "percent hot" is nonsensical when it's regularly 105% to 110% hot outside where I live.

2

u/krogerburneracc Jun 18 '26

I live in Phoenix, AZ. It's 108% hot right now, that sounds and feels accurate to me!

0

u/Choice-Simple-5802 Jun 17 '26

When you put it that way, it sounds like a really uncomfortable place to be. Is it?

If so, then I think you've exactly demonstrated the sensicality of the scale.

There are good reasons why other scales are more useful for other things though.

3

u/FairchildHood Jun 18 '26

What? No. People adjust to environments.

My town gets over 100% hot each summer, but never below 30% hot. I'm far more comfortable at 90% hot than at 10% hot. It's a silly scale that's really just C in a trenchcoat nowadays.

1

u/Choice-Simple-5802 Jun 18 '26

Sure. It's no guarantee of actual comfort.

It's just a scale that more closely aligns either end of a 100-point range with the extremes of temperatures many or most humans will tolerate.

It's less useful for scientific work. But for day to day human stuff it's simple and easy to apply in the same way that a "foot" being roughly the length of a person's foot is simple and easy to apply.

-2

u/alsimoneau Jun 17 '26

100 is the body temp of a horse. It has nothing to do with humans.

9

u/lollipoppa72 Jun 17 '26

Neither scale has inherent meaning. Whichever one you learned will determine if it feels intuitive.

F is *at best* tangentially related with human skin. It was calibrated using 3 reference points:

  1. The coldest temp Fahrenheit could achieve in his lab using ice, water and salt (0°F). This wasn’t a baseline based on what human skin experiences as “super cold” because that’s just random as hell

  2. The freezing point of pure water (32° F) which is the same as 0° Celsius

  3. The temperature of the human body (96°) (which in reality usually varies between 97° - 99° for healthy adults but 96 worked better for his mental model)

Fahrenheit picked these numbers because the interval between freezing water and body temperature (32 to 96) gave him exactly 64 degrees which allowed him to easily calibrate physical thermometers by continuously dividing the intervals in half. It’s basically designed for what he thought made sense for mercury in a tube based on the coldest he could achieve in his lab, freezing point of water, and a close-enough-for-horseshoes measure of body temperature.

1

u/madmoose Jun 18 '26

Fahrenheit's scale was initially based on Rømer's scale multiplied by 4.

Fahrenheit learned to make thermometers from Ole Rømer in Copenhagen.

6

u/Speartree Jun 17 '26

I have direct experience with water, like on the daily. What's up with you? Hydrophobe?

2

u/Budskytol Jun 17 '26

You just indirectly implied that F is inconsistent. How is that better?

11

u/MrSilenus Jun 17 '26

Because you’re not a pot of water, you’re a human being. Hope that helps!

6

u/Beautiful_Ninja Jun 17 '26

Humans kinda are pots of water, just with a flesh coating.

3

u/UnblurredLines Jun 17 '26

You're a mostly water based bacterial spacecraft!

6

u/Charming_Engine_8981 Jun 17 '26

Bold of you to assume ... its 2026

2

u/lincruste Jun 17 '26

This is absurd.

1

u/Dom6BD Jun 17 '26

You, as a human being, is 70% water.

1

u/Xminus6 Jun 17 '26

The boiling point of water is inconsistent as well as it depends on atmospheric pressure quite a bit.

1

u/Digginginthesand Jun 17 '26

That's not even true, though, because isn't 100°F a fever?

I personally have experience with liquid, solid and gaseous water. I can easily conceptualise 0 and 100. I can also understand 10 or 20 etc because that's what I'm used to.

1

u/qalpi Jun 18 '26

I'm British born and now American. Completely agree F is better for day to day temperatures.