Bonfire of The Vanity Units

HH-Growler

By The Metric Maven

Bulldog Edition

John Bemelmans Marciano gave a lecture on CSPAN’s BOOK TV (2014-08-12) to promote his book Whatever Happened To The Metric System?, which neither answers the proposed question, nor discusses the metric system itself. In his lecture, Marciano makes straw-man statements like:

The reason  that the metric system was needed in the first place was that decimals aren’t such a great way to divide things. Have you ever tried dividing a pizza into ten slices or five slices it’s not very easy. It’s really easy in four, six, eight, if you have a Sicilian pie you might do it in twelve or sixteen. … the only thing that ten is good for is counting on your fingers. ….they’re excellent for tallying, when you have to have a running tally of something, but they’re just not good for fractions.

Anyone who casually is acquainted with arithmetic will see that decimals are one of the most useful creations of mathematics. They are straightforward in magnitude, whereas fractions are an incomplete thought. The only way to further simplify numerical expression is with measures that can eliminate decimal points in everyday life. The metric system does this with grams, milliliters, and millimeters. The use of integer values in place of fractions is an upgrade from an abacus to a modern computer.  Marciano seems to have done little research on the metric system, or is willfully ignorant.

Marciano continues with both a revisionist and radically incomplete history of the metric system.  “So whereas decimals were supposed to make math and currency and everything available to everybody, it actually just made it available only to people who were really truly well educated.” Marciano appears to be implying that decimals were created and adopted so the power elite can rule over the innumerate populace. They are so complicated of a concept that only those who are highly educated can comprehend them? How on Earth does anyone use decimal currency? For Marciano, metric is not a commie plot, but a capitalist plot?  Decimals are apparently an antidemocratic force in our society?

He goes on to argue that the return of kings to Europe was very sad for John Quincy Adams “who had about the biggest crush on the metric system of anyone.” That statement is amazingly off the mark, perhaps by a few Gigameters? You are invited to read my essay about John Quincy Adams, and you will find that JQA had nothing remotely like a “crush” on the metric system, which is well documented in his own words. John Quincy Adams was the John Bemelmans Marciano of the 19th Century. Marciano clearly did not spend any time reading John Quincy Adams’ Report on Weights and Measures, or he would have known this. But this does not stop Maricano from interpreting it: “He [JQA] actually wrote, while he was Secretary of State, the greatest work ever written about measurement, and he talked about all the great things about the metric system….” JBM’s assertions are clearly at odds with JQA’s Report.

Marciano protests too much when, after he was asked by an audience member if he is anti-metric, he states:  “I am pro-metric, but I am also pro-customary measures. … I think we should keep it all.”

I see this statement as completely disingenuous. I’ve read Marciano’s book and his online editorials, listened to his NPR interview and this BookTV presentation. Marciano’s pro-metric assertion is doublespeak. Keep it all? Is Marciano for everyone choosing an old measure and using it if they want?

Marciano then states, to prove his pro-metric bone fides, that he thinks liquid measures should be metric. Marciano then reaches down and produces a bottle and states:

One fascinating thing of measurement is the growler. The growler started up… the growler is actually an old system of measure that was revived .. I think they were Wyoming brewers who..who restarted it. A growler is half a gallon .. its filled with four pints .. what I think the growler speaks to is that the craft brewing movement came out of the U.S. and it’s… I think the reason that the pint gets to be used is …it seems like this more honest system of measurement. Ben and Jerry’s when they wanted to have sort of a more .. homespun they revived the idea of using a pint for ice cream .. a pint really sounds like ..it comes right off of the farm. …almost all of our dairy is still in — solely in customary measures.  ..when you realize it’s still ingrained in people’s minds is when you actually buy in a whole unit. You’re not just buying 14 ounces of something you’re buying a pint of it, a quart of it, you’re buying a half-gallon of it. If it’s just something like 14 ounces or you know point four six milliliters we just pay no attention to it.

Growler-Fixed

Well, Marciano stops there when talking about liquid measures. I don’t see any argument using actual numbers with the metric system, or where he thinks one should use metric units for liquid measures. (Perhaps he could mention mis-dosages?) He does not follow through with his assertion that he is pro-metric for liquid measures. Marciano instead explains why people in the U.S.  just love the current mess. Marciano’s final statement  about 0.46 milliliters could be taken as hyperbole for how clueless people are about measures, or worst of all, it could be he is numerically clueless that 0.46 mL is 460 microliters, a value that would probably not be found on a store shelf.

HH-Fucking-Pint
— click to enlarge

What caught my attention more than all of the muddled assertions, was the notion of a growler. When I first heard Marciano discuss this unit, I figured it was just one more of the thousands and thousands of confusing pre-metric units that have existed in history. I have a number of engineering references for measurement units, and none of them mention a growler. I looked on Wikipedia, no entry for a measurement unit called a growler exists, but there is an entry under “beer bottle” with a reference to 64 ounce or 32 ounce growlers. The 32 ounce is sometimes called a howler for half-growler. This smells like marketing, and not measurement. The growler is almost certainly a made-up vanity unit for the microbrewing industry, which does not see the irony in using a metric prefix for self-identification and then marketing in Ye Olde English.

The growler is just a vanity unit, made up for marketing purposes. It appeals to novelty/pseudo-nostalgia and has no standing for measurement. It’s no different than using coffee speak to order  a tall cafee au lait dry single skinny. A growler is simply a hipster vanity unit.

There is a long worn pre-metric unit for one-half gallon. It is the pottle, and it is also equal to 32 gills to make the quantity plain for my U.S. readers who we can assume understand English measures and not metric. As Marciano is for all of them, perhaps we should include all gills:

Gills-1850

This reference from 1850 helps us to understand this new and important faux unit—the growler—even if there is no entry for it. One notes that U.S. measure is Great Britain’s old measure. Because when it comes to measurement, Marciano is for all of them, we should include all known growler quantities. Assuming a 32 gill growler:

  • British Growler = 4545 mL
  • Irish Growler = 3263 mL
  • Scottish Growler = 3389 mL
  • U.S. Growler =  3785 mL

So the growler varies from 3.26 liters to 4.55 liters. Yes, clearly the old measures are, as Marciano asserts, much more honest. Perhaps we should create a unit called the Enron?

I’m very surprised that an expert on measures like Marciano missed pointing this out to his audience, especially when following up on his assertion that he saw the metric system as a better idea for liquid measures. Why the imaginary growler? Perhaps pottle doesn’t have the marketing appeal of a growler and sounds too much like what one does after drinking said imaginary unit. Marciano likes to use Tom Wolfe as an A-list metric opponent, but Marciano, despite his protestations, seems to relish representing contemporary Bonfire of the Vanity Units.

Related essays:

John and the Argot-nauts

Whatever Happened to the Metric System?

Postscript

A member of my Sunday morning coffee klatch came across nothing but metric signage at a prison museum in Deer Lodge Montana. He took a photo of the sign which explains what a meter is for visitors who are unfamiliar with it:

DeerLodge

If you liked this essay and wish to support the work of The Metric Maven, please visit his Patreon Page and contribute. Also purchase his books about the metric system:

The first book is titled: Our Crumbling Invisible Infrastructure. It is a succinct set of essays  that explain why the absence of the metric system in the US is detrimental to our personal heath and our economy. These essays are separately available for free on my website,  but the book has them all in one place in print. The book may be purchased from Amazon here.


The second book is titled The Dimensions of the Cosmos. It takes the metric prefixes from yotta to Yocto and uses each metric prefix to describe a metric world. The book has a considerable number of color images to compliment the prose. It has been receiving good reviews. I think would be a great reference for US science teachers. It has a considerable number of scientific factoids and anecdotes that I believe would be of considerable educational use. It is available from Amazon here.


The third book is called Death By A Thousand Cuts, A Secret History of the Metric System in The United States. This monograph explains how we have been unable to legally deal with weights and measures in the United States from George Washington, to our current day. This book is also available on Amazon here.

The “Best Possible Unit Bar None”

Han_Solo_With_Nano-Second_Gun

By The Metric Maven

Bulldog Edition

My friend Kat does her best to make certain I have a contemporary cultural education, but often it does not adhere. Other than the first film, that is actually Episode IV—I had never seen any of the other Star Wars films. She sought to remedy my ignorance and showed me the entire cannon canon. During Episode IV came this infamous statement from Hans Solo:

“You’ve never heard of the Millennium Falcon?… It’s the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs.”

I noticed this confusion of time and distance when I first saw the movie. I had read Isaac Asimov’s The Universe: From Flat Earth to Quasar, and knew that  a parsec is a single word formed from the two words parallax and second. I also knew what stellar parallax is, and the history of the search to find it. I cringed in the original Star Wars showing. The statement reminded me of 1950s “science fiction” movies filled with hilarious scientific eye-rollers. I love watching those old movies for their campy nature and appearance. Star Wars had Peter Cushing, and so I saw it as more in line of the old Hammer Films. Unlike the 1958 Hammer film Dracula, Star Wars made an impact on culture which is still hard for me to fathom.

Parsec
Definition of Parsec (Wikimedia Commons)

A parsec is defined using a right triangle that has a side, which is one astronomical unit, and whose opposite angle is one arc-second. The astronomical unit (AU) is a unit that astronomers have created which is roughly the distance from the Sun to the Earth. I say roughly because the distance between the two bodies varies as the Earth orbits the Sun. The parsec is accepted for use with SI and is defined as exactly 149 597 870 700 meters or 149.6 Gigameters. Why not just make it 150 Gigameters? The angle opposite the triangle side of AU length is 4.848 136 8 microradians or one arcsecond. For those who prefer degrees this is 277.778 microdegrees.

When the second leg of the triangle (not the hypotenuse) is computed it has a length of 30.857 Petameters. In summary the Astronomical Unit is 150 Gigameters, and the Parsec is 31 Petameters. Astronomers however don’t use Gigameters and Petameters for distance, they use light years. We have all been told this is the distance that light travels in one year. This distance is 9.4607 Petameters. When we compute the length of a parsec in terms of a light year it is 3.2 light years.

In an earlier essay, I took astronomers to task for not using the large metric prefixes. They encompass the entire observable universe—why not use them? The large metric prefixes even allow for astronomical classifications in terms of metric prefixes, which might be useful for visualization.

I wrote a contributor to an astronomy periodical, and also to their editorial board, inquiring about why there has been no effort to change to metric units. The editorial board did not respond, but the contributor wrote back and said that he was trying to convey:

“….astronomy and sometimes other sciences to the general nontechnical public in a way that makes sense to them. As things now stand in the US, that’s not metric. If we say that rain falls at a speed of 9 meters per second, that’s not as meaningful as 22 miles per hour.

As for planetary distances, I’m not sure if a few hundred million miles can be “felt” by the average person but gigameters would be worse.

As for the light year, it’s the best possible unit bar none. The notion that light, the fastest thing there is, requires 4.3 years to get here from alpha Centauri makes that distance meaningful. Nothing else can do that. Remember, astronomy articles have [a] job to do….and it’s not to force feed an alien seeming system of units, but to help people grasp vast distances. Light years accomplishes that.”

The chicken and egg-little argument is always the first drawn upon. We must become metric as a country to use metric, and no metric will be used popularly until we do, which in turn makes certain the public never sees metric usage, which in turn makes them ignorant and unwilling to change to an “alien seeming system of units.” Doing otherwise, that is using metric, could bring the sky falling down on those who chose to violate this precept. The astronomy periodical would fail, and science “communicators” would all be unemployed.

I see the light year as exploiting a common unconscious substitution, that of time and distance—just like Hans Solo. Often when I ask how far a nearby town might be I hear: “oh….about 45 minutes.” The question was how far, but the answer was time. This time value almost certainly assumes a speed of about 60 miles per hour which is one mile per minute. So the distance is actually 45 car minutes or 2700 car seconds, not just 45 minutes. Traffic jams can radically alter the time, but not the distance.

In my view the light-year is not a unit, it is a culturally accepted mathematical product without a singular definition. A light-year is the speed of light (in a vacuum) multiplied by the length of a year. No units are specified. I could argue that a light year is 1.95 trillion leagues, or 1.117 quintillion barleycorns. What a light year does is allow us to substitute a time metaphor for a defined distance. I heard a person in a recent podcast discuss the idea of intentionally sending out radio signals for aliens to receive. It was pointed out that I Love Lucy broadcasts are about 70 light years out at this point. This could be estimated quickly by assuming that I Love Lucy went on the air about seventy years ago. No distance was computed, it does not tell us how far those VHF electromagnetic waves have traveled, it only is an expression of time as a metaphor for distance.

The light year is the kilowatt hour of astronomy. One could ask their meter reader how much electricity was used, and believe that 20 kilowatt hours is an answer in energy, when it is a time metaphor for energy. I direct you to my essay Joule in the Crown where I argue an actual unit of energy, the joule, should be used to meter electricity and gas rather than kilowatt hours and therms. Therms are a familiar unit?—right?

When we use word descriptions in place of units, we continue to encourage innumeracy. The astronomy contributors insistence on time rather than distance to describe distance is a public disservice in my view, but in his view he is giving the readers “what they want” without ever actually investigating or debating the issue. Hans Solo didn’t make a mistake confusing time and distance, he gave the audience “what they expected—what they wanted” a metaphor in place of a measurement.

Postscript:

A video of my short lecture at Nerd Nite Denver on 2014-09-25 has been posted here.


If you liked this essay and wish to support the work of The Metric Maven, please visit his Patreon Page and contribute. Also purchase his books about the metric system:

The first book is titled: Our Crumbling Invisible Infrastructure. It is a succinct set of essays  that explain why the absence of the metric system in the US is detrimental to our personal heath and our economy. These essays are separately available for free on my website,  but the book has them all in one place in print. The book may be purchased from Amazon here.


The second book is titled The Dimensions of the Cosmos. It takes the metric prefixes from yotta to Yocto and uses each metric prefix to describe a metric world. The book has a considerable number of color images to compliment the prose. It has been receiving good reviews. I think would be a great reference for US science teachers. It has a considerable number of scientific factoids and anecdotes that I believe would be of considerable educational use. It is available from Amazon here.


The third book is called Death By A Thousand Cuts, A Secret History of the Metric System in The United States. This monograph explains how we have been unable to legally deal with weights and measures in the United States from George Washington, to our current day. This book is also available on Amazon here.