Units of measurement

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 21 Mar 2011 20:56

Units of measurement is said to be among the oldest tools man has ever used. After all how can you hope to describe anything if you dont have something to compare it with? =)

So here have bothered creating units for their conpeople?

and I am personally interested in less straight forward systems where there are odd conversation factors and such. Like the old english system the still used system in USA and GB (Though they are less so than the old one).

While admittingly they are stupid in our modern world and have no function anymore they are more "natural" if you ask me and usuaully should be the standard for less advance civilizations and or the early scientific ones.

But also less straight forward I mean for example the unit of force in SI is mass*acceleration (kg*m/s²) but all of those are set to unity, 1 kg accelerating 1 m per second squared. Which is indeed convenient and nice for scientific things but it is less interesting to me. The Pound-force is more interesting because there it is pound*gravity acceleration. which is not a straightforward unity system. Are there any of you who uses a system like this?

I am currently in the process of working on it and I have gotten quite some but I will explain more in another post there =) Tell me what kind of systems do you have? Any uniqueness non-unity things you got? Why was that choosen? Does the system have history? Please tell it

I forgot to say that while any base units will be arbitrary mostly length, wieght and time (among the 3 most basic ones) Id like to know if you dont use unity derivation then whats the reason for this constant etc?

Yačay256 · Post by **Yačay256** » 21 Mar 2011 22:36

Here is the Mbaxtinhgiot measurement system.

It was initial formed by Sósoba Gógoje in the 600s BCE but of course has been greatly expand upon since then; nevertheless, it still has at its core multiples of 16 (the Mbaxtinhgiots use a hexadecimal numeral system.)

I might add that standardized measurement systems with the systematic use of a base (e.g. like the SI)began with the Indus Civilization in the Bronze age, who used decimal as well as binary.

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 21 Mar 2011 22:42

Yačay256 wrote:Here is the Mbaxtinhgiot measurement system.

the "Komîq" how was it decieded? Where was it taken from? What was the original thing it came from if its no longer fully based on it?

and it seems like a unity system

Yačay256 · Post by **Yačay256** » 21 Mar 2011 22:49

I just edited my post; in it I noted that the use of a unitary system goes back to the Bronze Age.

As for the Komîq, it is based on a 1 Puryx object being accelerated at a rate of 1 hexsecond squared over 16 Hîqsu; I tried to come up with other definitions other than this obviously SI based one, but gravity and osmosis are harder to measure... I may go back to gravity at some point though.

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 21 Mar 2011 23:28

Yačay256 wrote:I just edited my post; in it I noted that the use of a unitary system goes back to the Bronze Age.

As for the Komîq, it is based on a 1 Puryx object being accelerated at a rate of 1 hexsecond squared over 16 Hîqsu; I tried to come up with other definitions other than this obviously SI based one, but gravity and osmosis are harder to measure... I may go back to gravity at some point though.

Acctually I did use gravity though I did like this.

I have a system where you got (It is rather gory but i'll explain later on why) 1 Spine being standard unit of measurement and it contains 33 vertebras, from that I got the closest length I could get to a second-pendulum without using fractions of the smallest unit (second-pendelum is a pendelum with the frequency of twice that of the standard time unit here), then I used those values in the pendulum formula to get a gravitational pull constant which is close but not perfect to the real one and use that to get force value.-

Crumbs · Post by **Crumbs** » 23 Mar 2011 22:07

@Yacay:
A radian isn't technically a unit, as it is the ratio of the arclength to the radius, but if you are going to use radians, may I ask A) what is pi^c notation and B) why your conpeople use pi (instead of, say, tau)?

Yačay256 · Post by **Yačay256** » 24 Mar 2011 01:21

@Crumbs: My conpeople do not use our system of mathematical notation; I only use Hindu-Arabic Numerals, and abbreviations in the Latin Alphabet for units, as obviously no one could read my notation (which is not even complete, though getting close.)

As for your question about my notation with regards to Pi^C:

Wikipedia wrote:The radian is represented by the symbol "rad" or, more rarely, by the superscript c (for "circular measure"). For example, an angle of 1.2 radians would be written as "1.2 rad" or "1.2c" (the second symbol is often mistaken for a degree: "1.2°"). As the ratio of two lengths, the radian is a "pure number" that needs no unit symbol, and in mathematical writing the symbol "rad" is almost always omitted. In the absence of any symbol radians are assumed, and when degrees are meant the symbol ° is used.

Anyways, the pi radian is exactly the same in practice in the SI and the Mbaxtingiot system, thus I saw no need to elaborate.

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 24 Mar 2011 07:53

Crumbs wrote:@Yacay:
A radian isn't technically a unit, as it is the ratio of the arclength to the radius, but if you are going to use radians, may I ask A) what is pi^c notation and B) why your conpeople use pi (instead of, say, tau)?

I would say because pi is easier dealing with than tau where you must use division

Especially considering if you can use a constant for 2 or more formulas (namely circumference and area ofa circle) then it is a naturally preferable choice to avoid any division which was always a pain in the old days

Hālian · Post by **Hālian** » 24 Mar 2011 13:45

(scrapped)

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 24 Mar 2011 14:02

Ketsuban wrote:Safiria have used metric ever since the State adopted the preliminary SI system in 1802.

now thats neither anything new and/or unique/interesting now is it?

Hālian · Post by **Hālian** » 24 Mar 2011 14:15

(scrapped)

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 24 Mar 2011 18:13

Ketsuban wrote:Nobody ever said everything had to be new and/or unique/interesting :-D

if you read the initial post its about making up units not taking whats already there :P

teh_Foxx0rz · Post by **teh_Foxx0rz** » 24 Mar 2011 21:01

Units are the one thing which probably would be new and interesting :-P

zelos · Post by **zelos** » 24 Mar 2011 23:28

teh_Foxx0rz wrote:Units are the one thing which probably would be new and interesting :-P

yepp, new ones are more interesting than same old

though Radians are the exception because they are a mathematical concept structure which is independed upon the choice of systems

Yačay256 · Post by **Yačay256** » 13 May 2011 01:32

I just worked out the names of the multiples and submultiples of the units in the Ndygburo system (the system of measurement that I described, and have since improved, for the Mbätinga.)

I also decided that, like the Metric System, this system would become the international standard by the late 18th century, going so far as to influence the spoken numbers in many languages to have a hexadecimal spoken system alongside the traditional base in the area.

The CBB