Between 50 and 63 I'm in heaven. Anything higher than that and all i want to do is go swimming, which as an adult with responsibilities, i never get to.
Anything lower than that, and i have to wear more clothes and look fatter than i am.
Not to defend Fahrenheit, it's a nonsense scale, however: As with most subjective scales the entire scale can be split into good and not good. The top part is good and the bottom part is not good. The middle of the top part is seen as average good.
So around 75 degrees would be perfect, which is close enough for something as subjective as temperature.
This is why in things like movie or game reviews a 7/10 is seen as average. Like it's good, in the good part, but right in the middle not anything special. A 5/10 or lower is seen as not good, not worth seeing, not worth your time etc. This works for reviews, grades, person attractiveness rating etc.
Weather/room temp wise we probably never will. I'd rather think of my environment in terms of 0 to 100 than in terms of -18 to 38. For science and engineering, Celsius is ideal, and I can convert between the two in the very rare occasion I need to because I'm not an idiot who can't do basic math.
That's entirely a matter of habit. There is nothing special about 0°F (random point in the cold range?) or 100°F points (random point in the hot range?), you've been lied to.
We don't think -18°C to 38°C, we think -50°C to +50°C (regular Celsius weather thermometer, covers almost any temperature observed on Earth), with 0°C differentiating between snow/ice, "wintery" weather, and rain/mud, "non-wintery" one. That's how we know whether to take umbrella (no point if it snows, hat is your best friend), what kind of shoes are the best fit - cold-resistant or highly waterproof - or which kind of jacket is gonna fit the situation. Melting point of water is actually incredibly important weather-wise and entirely ignored by Fahrenheit scale.
When it's not winter, normal range is 0-40°C, with 20°C designating comfort temperature.
The SI base unit for temperature is Kelvin with 0 K being the coldest possible temperature. 273.15 K is the melting point of ice. But it’s a lot better suited for temperature differences. Celsius is only a derived unit.
And well, all units and measurement systems had a lot of changes over time because some things turned out to be impractical or inaccurate.
Initially Celsius had 100° as the freezing point of water, 0° as the boiling point of water. Fahrenheit had 0° as the coldest temperature he could produce and the (wrong) average human body temperature at 90°. Kelvin was initially defined via Celsius, that got reversed, they have the same scale. There is also Rankine, which starts at 0 like Kelvin, but uses the Fahrenheit scale.
And the US partially uses SI units anyways, all units are derived from them to use their superior base unit definitions. This system came into existence to have unit definitions that are better reproducible and change less over time. Since everything was redefined and all numbers changed anyways, they also tried to make use of the "new" decimal representation of numbers. And new unit names were nice to create some general units, in contrast to foot and pound, which were always different from place to place, at times even from city to city.
I don’t expect the US to ever switch. The US switched to international yard and pound instead of switching to a decimal system. After US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa agreed on that one, all countries who remained using these units had a uniform definition for them. Since then you don’t need to know any longer which yard or pound it was. Though not all units got standardized by that.
And some countries didn’t drop all old units and metricized some instead. Even SI kept the ton(ne). You can’t know what 1t exactly means without knowing the context, it can be 2240lb, 2000lb or 1000kg (~2204.6226lb).
Aviation is already backwards; aviators give distance to travel in nautical miles, visibility in statute miles, altitude and runway length in feet, speed in knots, weight in pounds, volume in gallons, and temperature in celsius. My favorite is the standard adiabatic lapse rate is given as 2°C/1000 feet.
It's the only way this meme makes sense. It's a complaint that humans don't like the average of the temperates that produce the feelings of extreme hot and extreme cold. You'd have to change math, change physiology, or lose linearity.
Fahrenheit is the best human-focused temperature scale. 0 is super cold, 100 is super hot, 50 is the line between short sleeve and long sleeve weather (assuming no wind). Anything outside these bounds, it simply isn't worth going outside. But then everyone at a latitude <|37|° will say "that's not that hot" and everyone at a latitude >|40|° will say "that's not that cold," so really it's the best Kansas-focused temperature scale
That last sentence was a largely facetious, poking fun at people who live in areas where it can get colder than 0° in winter or hotter than 100° in summer, who have a habit of telling other people that the extremes aren't that extreme. In reality the fahrenheit scale is pretty useful the world around, barring deserts
That's going to add a lot to simplicity and ease of understanding, for sure. And don't change the name of the scale or it will be too easy to distinguish them
25c is literally cock and ball torture what are ya on about. Then again I'm an Irish guy who hasn't left my country in nearly a decade so I don't even know what more than 25c feels like
I'm Brazilian and, although I'm not in the hottest area, summer easily hits 40°C, so yeah, 25°C is not perfect, that would be 20°C, but is pretty good still
Tbh, in summer I sleep with the airco on 27c. Where I live summer gets a nice and toasty 30c+ 24/7 @ 80%+ humidity. 25c feels amazing compared to that.
Before I moved here, I'd also have said 20c was ideal though :)
Interestingly if you take the middle of the freezing point (32F) and 100F, you do get a mildly warm 71. No this does not prove anything, yes I'll still say it.
Then if you average THAT with 50, you get 60.5... and you see all three numbers make a triangle. Illuminati confirmed.
Then you map it onto Celsius and see 32°F is 0°C, 71°F is 21,7°C and 100°F is 37,8°C.
Which coincides almost perfectly with the 0-20-40 framework we intuitively use in Celsius. 0 is deadly cold without warm clothes, 20 is warm, and 40 is deadly hot.
Turns out Celsius is good for weather, too. or it's illuminati
I'm similar, but two of the countries I've lived in are Australia (Victoria, central QLD and NorthWest WA) and the USA (Texas and Pennsylvania), so I've lived in 6 very different climates (also lived in the UAE)
The only one of these that got even close to 0°f was Pennsylvania, which over a few years has a few nights that dropped below 20°f, which was slightly less common as Victoria and central QLD seeing 120°f. WA and UAE frequently saw 120°f in the summer, a similar rate to Texas seeing 100°f (where I was) this last summer.
I doubt there are very many places where you'd reasonably expect to see 0°f and 100°f in the same year.
Where I live now stays between 30 and 90F. I lived in Saskatchewan and it would go between -40 and 100F. Crazy weather. Closest was maybe Denver but even Denver gets into the -20s F regularly.
I grew up in Iowa which would see 0f and 100f every year easily. Now I live in Bangkok which is basically just 90-100 year round. I'm not sure Celsius helps either that much. But outside Iowa I haven't cared much about the temp outside ever either.
I dunno, here in the Rockies that doesn't sound that weird. High altitude, low humidity. We'll get at least one or two 100+ heat waves in the summer (106 is the hottest I've seen here), and in the winter it can drop below zero at night. Granted, the last couple decades has made the former more common and the latter less, so I don't know if we'll see sub 0 this year. It used to be pretty common though
50 is great for just a light jacket and jeans. You'll never get too hot, you won't get too cold. So, yeah, as long as you've got clothes on it's pretty perfect.
If I want to wear less clothes then 70 is a good bit better, but 50 is damn comfortable.
Depends on a brine. If it's for raw meat, I'd lower it to 4°C. If it's for vegetable fermentation, I'd bump it over 16°C. Actually I don't know what 50F is good for. It's 10°C, just a miserable temperature.
My brain rejects the very concept of Fahrenheit. Every American I've met has tried to tell me, "Oh, conversion is easy. All you have to do is grok calculus!" Fuck that noise
What makes 0°F (-17,7°C) special for a human body? Is it the limit after which we don't feel any colder? No.
And what makes 100°F (37,7°C) special? Maybe we can't feel any hotter? No, we can. Is it the body temperature? No. What is it?
Maybe 50°F (10°C) is perfect? Nah, cold!
If we change 0°F to, say, 0°C and 100°F to 40°C, does it change the notion that 0°F is very cold for a human body and that 100°F is very hot? No, and as a bonus you get 50°F equaling that perfect 20°C.
Fahrenheit scale is super arbitrary and it's hilarious when it is posed as a "human-centric" scale. At the same time, the concept of Fahrenheit scale is unnecessarily complicated and the notion between Celsius is extremely clear - you can easily calibrate Celsius thermometer with nothing but kettle and freezer, right at home, right now.
Fahrenheit scale is super arbitrary and it's hilarious when it is posed as a "human-centric" scale.
The Fahrenheit scale is literally based on what was thought to be the limits of human comfort though. 0° F started as the lowest measured temperature in Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit's hometown, and 100° F was his estimate of normal human body temperature.
You think it's arbitrary because you're used to a different scale. To me, having a scale go from 0C to 40C seems arbitrary, especially because I live in an area where for 3 months out of the year, it's constantly below 0C, and it's critical to know the difference between -5C and -15C, rather than just lumping them both into the same "sub-zero" category. I'm the same vein, categorizing 10C as "jacket weather" is borderline useless. The "jacket" I'm going to wear at 10C is much heavier than the one I'm going to wear at 17C (if I wear one at all), for example.
By the way, you can do the exact same breakdown of the Fahrenheit scale, except it's more than twice as granular, and it goes from 0 to 100, like a bunch of other metric measurements... It boggles my mind when metric users use the 0 to 40 Celsius scale up as an argument against Fahrenheit.
I'm the kind of person that hates it when the water's too hot while taking a shower. Friends that I am living with take their shower way hotter to a point that I cannot resist the temperature
How the fuck do you base your own temperature system on something so subjective ???
Honestly people who insist on using Celsius for their daily lives rather than just for science have way more comfort than me having to deal with fractions of a degree on a regular basis. But I guess that's the point of metric, dealing with precise decimels constantly rather than just having a unit conveniently sized for the thing you're doing.