How big is a billion

is having a confusion between the two…

The only confusion is from people used to the pre-1974 usage who refuse to accept that the value has changed to the one the rest of the world uses.

But, then, I’d imagine these are the people that measure in pounds and stones, understand Fahrenheit, and grumble that money made so much more sense when it looked like 19/11¾… ;)

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04440/

money made so much more sense when it looked like 19/11¾…

Must find out where mum put the coin collection – which included farthings¹ but not groats, which pre-date my great-grandfather by a year or two.

It should be noted that different number bases, than 10, were used happily by a large population in the pre-decimal (coinage and measurement) era.

¹ Careful to not use an uppercase F, as my sister married one of those.

The only confusion is from people used to the pre-1974 usage

I’d have expressed that as “the only confusion is FOR people used to…” but yes, you’ve got a point. Not from me though, except in jest. No, I don’t use Imperial measurements normally, although of course I can at need, such as when working on old stuff or American stuff (when it might be different again…)

Yes, of course I understand Fahrenheit, but I don’t use it.

Careful to not use an uppercase F, as my sister married one of those.

Interesting. My imaginary friend/alter ego Penny Lane ( https://clive.semmens.org.uk/Fiction/PennyLane.html ) “lived” for several years with Greg Farthing, but didn’t marry him…

No, I don’t use Imperial measurements normally

I’m 5’ 7" and have been for years¹ and I have no idea what that is in metric – but then height, weight, age and other numbers are things I rather lost interest in many years ago.
I’m not yet at the “I’m x-ty-plonk years old, you know” stage.

¹ I forget when I stopped mentioning the extra 1/2 inch², but senior shrinkage may be trimming that off anyway.

I’m about 165cm nowadays, possibly even a bit less by now. Not measured recently. I used to be 5’6" – which is about 167.5 cm (1676.4mm really, but measuring human bodily dimensions to the nearest mm is nonsense).

Metric height is only useful when purchasing skis ;-)

The way the Americans do it sort of makes sense.

It doesn’t make any sense for the Americans to do it, as it aligns with the SI nomenclature of a different prefix every 3 zeros, and we know how they hate anything to do with that European metric communism. What is more likely it is just another mistake from the religious ignoramuses on the boat over, such as spilling some of the standard pint and gallon (which would eventually make their cars do even less miles to the gallon).

The British Imperial system made much more sense, as it consistent and didn’t involve having to make up more names when not necessary.

Ones
Tens
Hundreds
Thousands
Ten thousands
Hundred thousands
Millions
Ten millions
Hundred millions
Thousand millions
Ten thousand millions
Hundred thousand millions
Billions

Even the Indian system has its advantage – it’s consistent…

Das (10)
Sau (100)
Huzzar (1000)
Lakh (100,000)
Crore (100,00,000)
Arab (100,00,00,000)
Kharab (100,00,00,00,000)
Nil (100,00,00,00,00,000)
Padma (100,00,00,00,00,00,000)
Shankh (100,00,00,00,00,00,00,000)

Oops! Last few now corrected…

American influence again – watching a video about an aviation incident, I noticed that fuel quantities are in tons, rather than tonnes – i.e 2000 pounds (a US short ton) not a 2240 pound British ton, nor a metric 1000kg tonne. No wonder sometimes the wrong amount of fuel gets loaded, especially when the fuelling truck uses litres.

I just put it down to Americans wanting to sound richer than they are.

I mean, who wants to be a millionaire for a million millions, when you can be a billionaire after a thousand.

An acre was the area that a man could plough with a horse in one day. So an acre was smaller on a slope, or where the soil was stony. Paul Jennings wrote a piece on outlandish units: pressure in poods per square furlong, and so on. I believe that in the middle ages practically each European trading city had its own measures, which must have put a premium on deft abacists.

Standards, we got ’em. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ell_House

Even the Indian system has its advantage – it’s consistent…

I’ve seen that before, and it doesn’t seem easy to write or follow – as your pre-correction submission suggests

“gie ‘im and inch, an he’ll tak an ell”

quoted as equivalent to the English, “give him an inch, and he’ll take a mile” – but presumably more parsimonious :)

were used happily by a large population

Used happily, or used because there was no choice?

Yes, of course I understand Fahrenheit, but I don’t use it.

All I know of Fahrenheit is:

• 28-is-82
• 98.6 is average body temp
• 212 is boiling
• It took him three tries to get the scale correct, so…

The only time I encounter it is American sources and apps that either default to F, or don’t bother with a C option. Thankfully British sources (like weather reports) either use C or give both, and “the other one” can simply be ignored.

That would be, what, 1.27cm ?

1.27? You’re half an inch tall? One of the Borrowers? :)

5’7 sounds like an average male height, so I’d guess something around 170cm, or 1.7m.

I’m 165-168 (depending on how much effort I put into standing up straight). No idea what that is in funny-measures.
Weight? So-many kilos (a little too much, I blame European chocolate!). At school I was measured in stones, no idea what that is without Googling.
Resting pulse around 60-65bpm. Blood pressure is 60-80 over 90-130. So if I get up quickly and see stars, gotta sit right back down.
Actually, I have a doodah here on the shelf. Hang on. 124/76 with a bpm of 69. Yeah, that’s about what I’d expect having just gotten up for more tea.

but measuring human bodily dimensions to the nearest mm is nonsense

Absolutely this. You’re a different size in the morning (when lying in bed allows your bits to flop around) than in the evening (when all your spinal bits have been squished together all day). Plus, while one can go on a diet to reduce unwanted girth, it’s not as if it’s easy or even useful to change height. It’s pretty much just a metric to use alongside weight to determine body mass, but then even that is inconsistent. Average BMI is 33.5 for a female in Tonga but only 25.6 in Germany, 24.9 in Sweden, 21.7 in Japan. Different ethnicities are not only built differently, but have different values on what an ideal person should be.

Hundred thousand millions

Four hundred and twenty six thousand million, eight hundred and sixteen million… yeah, it can quickly become a bit of a mouthful.
I think the “every three zero” nomenclature makes it easier when dealing with, say, national debt, aid packages, government IT systems and half-abandoned railway projects…

An acre was the area that a man could plough with a horse in one day.

…ploughed with a yoke of oxen in a day, as defines around 1300. It also said that an acre was forty perches in length and four across. A perch is about 5 metres. That’s one big-arse bird.

American influence again

Given mom’s heritage, there are quite a number of American cookbooks on the bookshelf (that I haven’t really looked at as I suck at cooking). I can tell the recipes that interested mom, as there are pencil annotations translating the peculiar Americanisms to metric…along with snarky comments about “1 cup of flour” doesn’t specify whether or not it is to be sifted first (will make a difference), and what sort of [redacted for modern sensibilities] measures a cup of butter.
I fully agree. It’s not enough that their ounces and pints (and, god help us, “fluid ounces”) are different to the British equivalents, but to then throw in “cups” and an assortment of complicated “spoon” measurements. I get that a soup spoon is deeper than a desert spoon, but coffee spoon vs teaspoon? As far as I’m concerned the small ones are teaspoons and are for stirring tea and extracting the teabag. Yes, they’re all slightly different… but then so are all the forks. So why not just say “so many grams” (or fractions of an ounce). Something definitive that can be translated.

Okay, rant over. But, American recipes…make my head hurt.

Cherry Blossom Fudge (makes one 8×8 dish)

1 cup white sugar
3/4 cup condensed milk
1 (3 oz) pack of cherry gelatin
1 pinch salt
2 cups semisweet chocolate chips
1 cup butter
3/4 cup maraschino cherries, cut in half
1 teaspoon vanilla extract

Mix milk, salt, sugar in a pan, bring to boil. Mix in gelatin, boil 4 minutes. Take off heat and whisk in choc chips, butter, vanilla, and cherries. Pour into buttered pan. Chill for at least two hours.

It’s a random selection from a book called “Candy Making” that I got off Amazon fairly cheaply. My choice is to either find and buy a “cup” measure, or to translate the amounts into something sensible. The complication is that equivalent amounts depend upon the product. A cup of flour will be different to a cup of sugar, so we’re using a volume measurement in place of weight and… maybe it makes sense for an American to just scoop up some of this and some of that, but it’s really kind of bizarre to me as I’m used to measuring stuff. So I simply don’t perceive things like butter by volume.

I’m 165-168 (depending on how much effort I put into standing up straight).

Near as dammit the same height I was at your age. Standing up straight doesn’t quite achieve the same height any more…

I think the “every three zero” nomenclature makes it easier when dealing with, say, national debt, aid packages, government IT systems and half-abandoned railway projects…

The Indian scheme – 1,2,3 then every two zeroes – makes that even easier. Except that a rupee is now only worth about a penny. (They were 8p when I first went to India in 1983, the pound was worth a fair bit more than it is now, and the exchange rate – then as now – makes most things stupidly cheap in India.)

Blood pressure is 60-80 over 90-130.

Don’t know if it’s backwards in France, but here it’s normally (big number) over (small number). 90/60 is the low end of normal; 130/80 a tad high. Mine’s usually a tad high (140/80) but sometimes used to be as low as 60/35 (lie on the floor and get the feet up before you faint time) – but that’s stopped since I got my pacemaker, which won’t let my pulse go below 45.

A perch is about 5 metres. That’s one big-arse bird

Or the rivers are not safe places to be.

BP. Mines apparently average for a 30 yr old. This was commented on when I was having the second cataract done (binocular vision again – yay!)

it’s normally (big number) over (small number)

Yep. That’s exactly how my sphygmomanometer displays it, but I’m tired and got it back to front in the description (but correct when reading off the device). Sorry.

In France, for some reason, it’s exactly the same but divided by ten.
So my 124/76 would be something like 12/8 (I’m guessing they’d round to nearest?).

Near as dammit the same height I was at your age.

When I was at boarding school, I was small and thin (actually was for most of my childhood). They wanted to put me on growth hormone but mom vetoed that hard saying, and I quote, “if he is destined to be small he can be a jockey and keep me in the manner to which I will become accustomed”. Completely deadpan trolling there. ;)

Turns out, however, that not only was she right (I’m not tiny) but she was so far beyond right: https://www.theguardian.com/news/1999/aug/08/food.foodanddrink

Sorry.

You’re forgiven! 8~)

When I was at boarding school, I was small and thin (actually was for most of my childhood).

Me too likewise – until I was 14, when suddenly I put on a spurt and was briefly one of the biggest in my class. No-one thunk of growth hormone for me – sent me to a “convalescent home” for a while instead ( https://clive.semmens.org.uk/Recounts/Scarborough.html ) although the excuse for that was my asthma, but I think they blamed my small size on the asthma anyway.

I’m not tiny either – although I’m the smallest in the family – my father was 150mm taller than me, and my brother and both sisters are 100mm taller. But I’m solidly built – 72kg of me without being significantly fat. Been almost exactly the same size all my adult life.

Whoa… I’m… 72kg as well. 🤯

Up until my, say, late 30s I was closer to 60kg, but slowly started putting on some extra weight until I’ve settled down just a little over 70kg.
I don’t think I’m solidly built, this is padding for when I’m old and decrepit and fall over. ;)

Given my, um, “family connections”, I have no idea about antecedents regarding anything (like height, tendencies for certain illnesses, etc) so I can’t say if I was just an anomaly as a small child. My father didn’t stand out as being especially big (just especially absent), and my mom was just a little shorter than I am now, so… <shrug>

Posted too early in error

I’m metric in height, temperature, DIY and recipes, but imperial in personal weight, motoring fuel consumption and travel distances – mostly because the metric equivalents (kg, litres per 100km & km) don’t give me the reference I need to make sense of it for comparisons.

I was recently told the Murrican measures were based on wine, not water, and that that explains why the startling difference in fluid ounces. Yes, they’re nuts.

And ‘normal’ temp of 98.6F is very dodgy; it’s a value rounded up to Celsius, derived from a somewhat iffy study done 150 years ago by a German doctor, measuring under-arm temps with a thermometer that still exists and is known to be quite out of calibration. It seems 36.5C is considered more ‘normal’ these days. I guess we’re cooling down and turning into lizards…