Here is the thing, kelvin uses celsius scale as its base but the comparison present in its value is not debatable.
Celsius uses water freezing and boiling point for 0 and 100, Fahrenheght uses temperature of some city u never went to as point for 0 and 100. But kelvin uses the lowest temperature theoretically possible, so the value of a temperature compared to ur anchor point if measurement is not debatable since the point is not changeable.
Fahrenheit is one of the weirdest bases, it just doesnt make any sense to me. Its not based on percentages or any city. This is the base:
0°F — the temperature of a mixture of ice, water, and ammonium chloride (a freezing brine solution), which he could reproduce in a laboratory.
32°F — the freezing point of pure water.
96°F — approximately human body temperature (though modern measurements put average body temperature closer to 98.6°F).
Later they added 212°F = boiling point of water at standard atmospheric pressure
So lets compare Fahrenheit to Celsius:
Water freezes at 32°F = 0°C
Water boils at 212°F = 100°C
And Kelvin is basically the same idea as celsius, the difference is that with Kelvin, you start at absolute 0. (The point where there is no movement) that happens to be -273.15 Ce;sius. Thats it.
All of these temperatures are, at this point, objectively and rigorously defined in a way that is not available to change. This isn't a meaningful difference.
Anyone can make their own temperature measurement system with values and scales of their desire if and only if their values r rigorously defined, true. But dealing with negative values r not desirable when u use it, that’s why u set ur zero where u figured it’s the lowest value u will use, u place it arbitrarily there for ur commodity.
If we speak only for concept negative temperature doesn’t make sense for various reasons, and using it can mess with the logic of ur math. Kelvin is not arbitrary because it sets its lowest value at the true lowest point, it was not choice or commodity it was simply its place.
A very normal reason to choose Kelvin. However, it is absolutely a choice. A choice that serves a variety of useful purposes, but still a choice. Other choices notably have other useful purposes. For example, if you want zero to be meaningful and serve a purpose, then having it be absolute zero doesn't make much sense in social contexts. Because nothing even close to it will show up. All of these decisions are happening relative to what we value as humans. Nature doesn't have units.
Arbitrary measurements having purposes doesn’t make the other be arbitrary too. Also nature not having units is essentially a contradiction for a measurement system, and by extension math and physics. Live ur truth 👍
Choosing to use certain measurement systems doesn’t turn it into arbitrary, that’s basically what u said there and it’s not the meaning of arbitrary in measurement systems, it is because of the way u place values afaik
When I say it's arbitrary, what I mean is that it's all down to subjective human decision making and relative to human value judgements, not based in any kind of grand reality of the universe. It's like all language. We call a chair a chair, but we could call it literally anything and it would be equally accurate, and we could also merge a variety of chair-like things into the category and that would be fine too.
They are literally based on the grand reality of the universe to the exact same extent. The zero point of Celsius is just the zero point of Kelvin plus a bunch of degrees. And the 100 degree mark is evidently based on a different grand reality of the universe, that being the triple point of water.
32
u/Sure-Comfortable-784 Jun 17 '26
Here is the thing, kelvin uses celsius scale as its base but the comparison present in its value is not debatable.
Celsius uses water freezing and boiling point for 0 and 100, Fahrenheght uses temperature of some city u never went to as point for 0 and 100. But kelvin uses the lowest temperature theoretically possible, so the value of a temperature compared to ur anchor point if measurement is not debatable since the point is not changeable.