• SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That was the joke, which I was trying to help further by pretending that there was nothing wrong with that.

      • Hazmatastic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I mean, you could just convert the Farenheit or Celsius degrees to radians like they were angle degrees. “Bake at 6.109 radians for 45 minutes” still can mean “Bake at 350 degrees for 45 minutes” if you accept the implicit Farenheit scale. Radians would still be ambiguous regarding the base scale used, but it’s as ambiguous as “degrees” is so not really an issue.

        So I mean, there’s no real reason to do it but also no reason you can’t.

        • Pulptastic@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          You have to specify radians fahrenheit for that so we don’t confuse it with radians Celsius and blacken the thing.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Except temperature degrees aren’t related angle degrees. You’d be using a pun as a unit conversion.

          • Hazmatastic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Oh they’re unrelated, and it’s a pointless conversion I know.

            Technically speaking these would be unrelated radians under the same name measuring different units. But you could still do it if you really wanted

    • Paradachshund
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Well look at mister smarty-pants with his science facts over here!

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    Joule is the best unit you can literally apply it to everything because it’s essentially a raw unit of energy.

      • wischi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Joules is unfortunately a vector because it’s over a distance in a direction.

        What? Joule is an energy unit and energy is a scalar quantity and not a vector. There is no “energy direction” and no “distance”.

        Edit: even your edit doesn’t make sense. Provide a source that says that energy or joule is somehow a vector.

      • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        If you set one of the axis to 1 than it’s effectively a scalar that’s why I love it so much.

        • poinck@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Please, someone fix the meme. Joule x a vector (represented by angles measured in radians).

  • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    My scale for expressing mean kinetic energy flux is superior to your scale for expressing mean kinetic energy flux. I have formed an identity around this and will smugly argue about it on the internet.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Hey now, I don’t argue for Celsius, I just argue against people saying Fahrenheit is better for silly reasons.