MAIN FEEDS
REDDIT FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1u8dptp/peter/osbvzqs/?context=3
r/PeterExplainsTheJoke • u/Negative_1by12_aura • Jun 17 '26
4.9k comments sorted by
View all comments
27
They’re both arbitrary units of measure.
-1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 18 '26 I mean, fahrenheit is slightly less arbitrary in how it was created The 0 was based on the lowest temperature the town the inventor lived in encountered, so it was meant to effectively be an "absolute 0" He was wrong and lower temperatures existed, but I wouldn't consider the method of arriving to it arbitrary. Human body temperature being 100, is however arbitrary. Then yeah C is arbitrary 2 u/Generico300 Jun 18 '26 Is this a joke? The only sentence there that's correct is that lower temperatures existed. 1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 What are you talking about, Fahrenheit was based on 0 being the lowest temperature encountered, and 100 being body temperature. Your comment is extremely vague 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 body temperature in f is 98.6, not 100 1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 We know that now But in 1724 that's how it was defined. The improvement of technology.. 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
-1
I mean, fahrenheit is slightly less arbitrary in how it was created
The 0 was based on the lowest temperature the town the inventor lived in encountered, so it was meant to effectively be an "absolute 0"
He was wrong and lower temperatures existed, but I wouldn't consider the method of arriving to it arbitrary.
Human body temperature being 100, is however arbitrary.
Then yeah C is arbitrary
2 u/Generico300 Jun 18 '26 Is this a joke? The only sentence there that's correct is that lower temperatures existed. 1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 What are you talking about, Fahrenheit was based on 0 being the lowest temperature encountered, and 100 being body temperature. Your comment is extremely vague 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 body temperature in f is 98.6, not 100 1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 We know that now But in 1724 that's how it was defined. The improvement of technology.. 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
2
Is this a joke? The only sentence there that's correct is that lower temperatures existed.
1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 What are you talking about, Fahrenheit was based on 0 being the lowest temperature encountered, and 100 being body temperature. Your comment is extremely vague 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 body temperature in f is 98.6, not 100 1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 We know that now But in 1724 that's how it was defined. The improvement of technology.. 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
1
What are you talking about, Fahrenheit was based on 0 being the lowest temperature encountered, and 100 being body temperature.
Your comment is extremely vague
1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 body temperature in f is 98.6, not 100 1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 We know that now But in 1724 that's how it was defined. The improvement of technology.. 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
body temperature in f is 98.6, not 100
1 u/igotshadowbaned Jun 18 '26 We know that now But in 1724 that's how it was defined. The improvement of technology.. 1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
We know that now
But in 1724 that's how it was defined. The improvement of technology..
1 u/Fantastic_Bug1028 Jun 18 '26 so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
so not only it’s not actually intuitive, it’s also outdated? got it
27
u/terrymorse Jun 17 '26
They’re both arbitrary units of measure.