Why squirrels are 'splooting' in the heat
- Thread starter wegs
- Start date
On the subject of measurements...
Recently, I bought an ''essential oil diffuser'' and the instructions state to pour no more than 100 mL of water into the ''tank''...here we go again.
So, it's just shy of 1/2 cup. (.422675 mL to be exact)
Like using millimeters to measure precipitation, mL shouldn't be used in this instance. (in my opinion)
Recently, I bought an ''essential oil diffuser'' and the instructions state to pour no more than 100 mL of water into the ''tank''...here we go again.
So, it's just shy of 1/2 cup. (.422675 mL to be exact)
Like using millimeters to measure precipitation, mL shouldn't be used in this instance. (in my opinion)
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
What does this refer to? .422675 ml of what? It seems to have no relation to anything else you mentioned.(.422675 mL to be exact)
Oh I see. I think what you meant to say is that "one millilitre is equal to .0422675 cups".
The rule of wisdom that we were taught is not to try to convert between systems. Like learning a new language, try to immerse yourself. (After all, you learned the size of a cup the same way).
The beauty of the metric system is how easy it is to learn.
OK, your one cheat is the starting point: "a litre is about a quart". That's a cube 4 inches (10cm) on a side.
100 milliilitres is simply one tenth of that litre/quart.
Last edited:
Lol! My bad. I didn’t explain that correctly.
When I read the instructions that came with the diffuser, I Googled “how many milliliters are in 1/2 cup?”
Because the diffuser tank is small, I knew it couldn’t hold more than half cup so here is what came up:
1/2 US cup = 118.294 milliliters
100 milliliters of water = .422675 of a cup (US)
So to me, it would seem easier to simply state in the diffuser directions that you shouldn’t exceed 1/2 cup of water in the tank. (I tested it with slightly over 1/2 cup of water for the record, and it was fine, too. And by “fine,” I mean that it wasn’t close to spilling over the sides of the tank.)
Sorry for the confusion, but hope this helps.
Last edited:
Too late! ^_^Definitely, as Dave says, don't convert one unit into the other. Metric is more logical so there would be no need to covert metric into imperial. Wegs, stop doing that!
And yet Canadians do it all the time. We've been doing it for generations. When one system works, we use it. When the other system works, we use that. You even hear people using both systems in the same sentence.
I say diversity in measurement is a good thing, like diversity in anything else.
I don't agree with that either.
Another example of the benefits of diversity: using two or more languages in the same sentence.
I learned what a cup was long before I had any idea it was used to measure stuff. Same with a foot.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Thats not conversion.
Conversion is "20C, um ... double it and add 30 is about 70F"
And that's what people do when they use two systems in one sentence.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
No. I am 5 foot 7 and its 100km to St Catherines.
I have no clue how tall I am in cm. Or how many miles to St. Catharines
I don't agree with the metric system of how many km to 100 litres
Prefer Imperial system miles per gallon.
Know how many gallons in your tank, multiple by how miles for one and know how far a tank will take you
Km per 100 litres need to divide litres in tank by 100 and multiple that number by how many km per 100
Why was the calculation not left as km per litre. I'm guessing because you don't get kms from a litre so you finish up with a fraction of a km to multiple by the fractioned number of litres in tank
Prefer Imperial system miles per gallon.
Know how many gallons in your tank, multiple by how miles for one and know how far a tank will take you
Km per 100 litres need to divide litres in tank by 100 and multiple that number by how many km per 100
Why was the calculation not left as km per litre. I'm guessing because you don't get kms from a litre so you finish up with a fraction of a km to multiple by the fractioned number of litres in tank
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
It is for no other reason than to discourage conversion and reset our expectations.I don't agree with the metric system of how many km to 100 litres
Prefer Imperial system miles per gallon.
Know how many gallons in your tank, multiple by how miles for one and know how far a tank will take you
Km per 100 litres need to divide litres in tank by 100 and multiple that number by how many km per 100
Why was the calculation not left as km per litre. I'm guessing because you don't get kms from a litre so you finish up with a fraction of a km to multiple by the fractioned number of litres in tank
Neddy Bate
Valued Senior Member
In the U.S., plumbing fixtures usually have American National Pipe Threads (NPT), but we have customers that sometimes request special threads to be British Standard Pipe (BSP) for shipping overseas. I find it strange that I have heard a few different people here, even machinists, call the BSP threads "metric" even though they are designated by fractions of an inch just like NPT. The designations being fractions of an inch, rather than millimetres, should be the first clue. Plus it should stand to reason that the one named "British" should be even more "Imperial" than the one named "American"! But because it is foreign to them, they just say "metric" anyway. *facepalm*
I noticed a couple of years ago that new-car commercials were citing fuel economy in miles-per-gallon again. It's interesting that people seem to prefer miles-per-gallon even when they don't know exactly how many gallons they are buying or how many miles they are going.
It's also interesting that fuel economy has always been called "mileage".
That is interesting. Kilomage (is that a word? If not what should be in its place?
The owners manual would give tank capacity so easy to calculate the capacity in gallons Of which there are two versions, at least, English and American
I use a app called Convert Pad which has 99 categories of stuff needing converting
My main use is currency $ = Rp = $
Great app and never seen any ads
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I doesn't matter what the actual values are, it's the rate of consumption that's important.
"My trip durations and gas consumption are determined by my ongoing travel needs. All I care about is a fuel efficiency that won't tax my budget."
And fuel efficiency is an approximate thing. 25mpg used to be good. You don't want a car that only gets 12mpg.
The technical term is 'fuel efficiency'.
The colloquial term is still mileage. No real need to change it.
It's not like we stopped saying
"I hung up on him" when we stopped hanging our phones from the wall,
or "I taped Stranger Things for You" when we stopped recording on tape.
Last edited:
I’ve only used kilometers for small distances and don’t see a need to use it for driving distances, etc…
Back to the OT - I saw an alligator “splooting” today - he crawled out of the water and just sort of “flattened” himself on the grass under a tree. His feet off the ground - kind of sticking them out. Maybe he was working his core. lol
I watched this through binoculars, on the other side of my backyard lake.
Back to the OT - I saw an alligator “splooting” today - he crawled out of the water and just sort of “flattened” himself on the grass under a tree. His feet off the ground - kind of sticking them out. Maybe he was working his core. lol
I watched this through binoculars, on the other side of my backyard lake.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
If not driving distances then ... what? Measuring for drapes and sofa cushions?
For running distances, “I’m running a 5k this weekend…”
That sounds way better than “Hey, I’m running a 3.107 mile race this weekend!”
Things like that.
But then "I'm running 5 miles" sounds waaay better than "I'm running 8.04672 kilmoeters!"