Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

# Is 2" C equal to 3.6" F?

 Posts: 1,513 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/5/2015 9:36:20 AMPosted: 1 year agoWhy is it that I see articles about climate change all over the place that say 2" C is 3.6" F?2" C is 35.6" F why are they saying it's 3.6" F?No god and no religion can survive ridicule. No political church, no nobility, no royalty or other fraud, can face ridicule in a fair field, and live. - Mark Twain
 Posts: 7,440 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/5/2015 9:51:52 AMPosted: 1 year agoAt 10/5/2015 9:36:20 AM, Accipiter wrote:Why is it that I see articles about climate change all over the place that say 2" C is 3.6" F?2" C is 35.6" F why are they saying it's 3.6" F?It's not a temperature measurement, it's a temperature change.The conversion is F1 = ((9 * C) / 5) + 32With a 2"C difference you have F2 = ((9 * (C + 2)) / 5) + 32F2 - F1 = (9 * 2) / 5 = 3.6" (after simplification)Hope that helps.Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.
 Posts: 7,440 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/5/2015 12:36:01 PMPosted: 1 year agoI suspect I have over-complicated the explanation. A 1"C change in temperature corresponds to a 1.8"F change. However, Celsius and Fahrenheit also have different baselines of 0" and 32" for the freezing point of water and that has to be factored in when converting temperature measurements as opposed to temperature changes.We would all be so much better off if the Americans finally modernized and went metric!Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.
 Posts: 1,310 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/6/2015 4:55:18 AMPosted: 1 year agoAt 10/5/2015 12:36:01 PM, dee-em wrote:I suspect I have over-complicated the explanation. A 1"C change in temperature corresponds to a 1.8"F change. However, Celsius and Fahrenheit also have different baselines of 0" and 32" for the freezing point of water and that has to be factored in when converting temperature measurements as opposed to temperature changes.We would all be so much better off if the Americans finally modernized and went metric!Eff that! Imperial4life!Nice work on the explanation, though.
 Posts: 7,440 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/6/2015 5:26:18 AMPosted: 1 year agoAt 10/6/2015 4:55:18 AM, Burzmali wrote:At 10/5/2015 12:36:01 PM, dee-em wrote:I suspect I have over-complicated the explanation. A 1"C change in temperature corresponds to a 1.8"F change. However, Celsius and Fahrenheit also have different baselines of 0" and 32" for the freezing point of water and that has to be factored in when converting temperature measurements as opposed to temperature changes.We would all be so much better off if the Americans finally modernized and went metric!Eff that! Imperial4life!Nice work on the explanation, though.You guys are die-hards. :-)Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.
 Posts: 546 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/6/2015 7:50:42 AMPosted: 1 year agoAt 10/6/2015 5:26:18 AM, dee-em wrote:At 10/6/2015 4:55:18 AM, Burzmali wrote:At 10/5/2015 12:36:01 PM, dee-em wrote:I suspect I have over-complicated the explanation. A 1"C change in temperature corresponds to a 1.8"F change. However, Celsius and Fahrenheit also have different baselines of 0" and 32" for the freezing point of water and that has to be factored in when converting temperature measurements as opposed to temperature changes.We would all be so much better off if the Americans finally modernized and went metric!Eff that! Imperial4life!Nice work on the explanation, though.You guys are die-hards. :-)The US system is related to the Imperial system, but the two are not the same. Imperial units were introduced to Britain in 1824, long after the American Revolution. As such, the US and Imperial systems are slightly different.https://en.wikipedia.org...
 Posts: 7,440 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 10/9/2015 12:43:16 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 10/6/2015 4:55:18 AM, Burzmali wrote:At 10/5/2015 12:36:01 PM, dee-em wrote:I suspect I have over-complicated the explanation. A 1"C change in temperature corresponds to a 1.8"F change. However, Celsius and Fahrenheit also have different baselines of 0" and 32" for the freezing point of water and that has to be factored in when converting temperature measurements as opposed to temperature changes.We would all be so much better off if the Americans finally modernized and went metric!Eff that! Imperial4life!Nice work on the explanation, though.Let's hope you switch over before we send humans to Mars. I'd hate to be the programmer if this confusion resulted in the loss of human life.https://en.wikipedia.org...The primary cause of this discrepancy was that one piece of ground software supplied by Lockheed Martin produced results in a United States customary unit ("American"), contrary to its Software Interface Specification (SIS), while a second system, supplied by NASA, that used those results expected them to be in metric units, in accord with the SIS. Software that calculated the total impulse produced by thruster firings calculated results in pound-seconds. The trajectory calculation used these results to correct the predicted position of the spacecraft for the effects of thruster firings. This software expected its inputs to be in newton-seconds.[16]Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.
© 2017 Debate.org. All rights reserved.