In my opinion, Fahrenheit is a much better system for weather. Anything below 0°F and above 100°F is actively dangerous for a person to exist in. Anything in between is just normal weather. For anything scientific, I think K makes more sense than C. To me, C is actually only rarely useful.
Edit, because people seem to be offended by the suggestion that the system they don’t use is more practical in a very specific context:
What you are used to is definitely best for you, but I’m talking about the general practicality and usefulness in specific contexts. C in the context of states of water makes sense, and is practical and useful. F in the context of weather makes sense, because 0 to 100 is just normal weather in places with four seasons. In the context of weather, it is both practical and useful. K is practical and useful in pretty much every scientific context. To say memorizing -17 to 38 vs memorizing 0 to 100 is the same is silly, because 0 and 100 are very meaningful to the human mind. Of course, what you are used to will be what your mind immediately goes to, it does not change the fact that 0°F to 100°F for weather is more understandable, 0°C to 100°C for freezing and boiling water is more understandable, and 0°K being truly no thermal energy with units the same size as C is better for scientific contexts.
In my opinion C and F are equally good for everyday use. Neither is better than the other. Although C is more “scientific” than F, it’s still a very much arbitrary scale at the end of the day. Knowing water freezes at 0C is not different at all than knowing it freezes at 32F for the purposes of knowing you might have ice on the road. Knowing 35C is hot weather is no different than 100F. The human mind can adapt to each of them just as easily as the other. Neither of them makes your life harder or easier than the other.
For normal weather, 0°F to 100°F is easier to understand than -17°C to 38°C. Just like 0°C for freezing water and 100°C for boiling water is easier to remember. It’s just how our brains work. We like nice round numbers. Plus, there’s a higher fidelity between 0 and 100 than between -17 and 38.
F is just random and some people are used to it, and then try to assign meaning to the random points.
Why should the temperature of a horse have any relation with the weather?
It really makes no real difference for everyday use. The higher resolution of the scale is not relevant at all for deciding what to wear outside. It takes no time at all for your brain to adjust to either one of them. 38 becomes no different to you than a nice round 100.
What you are used to is definitely best for you, but I’m talking about the general practicality and usefulness in specific contexts. C in the context of states of water makes sense, and is practical and useful. F in the context of weather makes sense, because 0 to 100 is just normal weather in places with four seasons. In the context of weather, it is both practical and useful. K is practical and useful in pretty much every scientific context.
Why would anyone care about -17°C? It is an arbitrary number without any relevance. The only relevance it has to you is if you think in Fahrenheit where it is an arbitrary zero point. Not even 38°C is a number you frequently hear used, unless its seriously hot and it happens to be the ambient temperature. Human body temperature is more relevant, but it isn’t a round number in either of the measurement systems, nor is it identical between individuals either.
That “higher fidelity” argument just makes me wonder if some people don’t know the decimal system. 22.7°C, there you go.
Most people don’t need that level of precision but it if they do, they simply add a position after the comma and are done with it.
I have the impression you don’t know how rounding works. The two temperatures you quote would be different even with only full numbers.
In any case, for the case of body temperature, you do exactly that, use as many positions after the comma as you want. (Usually more the one is pointless though as you can reliably measure that anyway)
In physics maybe but plenty of scientific fields where your temperatures are commonly not superfreezing. Using K just bloats up your numbers then, without any benefit. In case you ever need K, just add 273.15 to the temperature in °C. The only difference is the base, the increments are the same. Fahrenheit is much less compatible with Kelvin.
In my opinion, Fahrenheit is a much better system for weather. Anything below 0°F and above 100°F is actively dangerous for a person to exist in. Anything in between is just normal weather. For anything scientific, I think K makes more sense than C. To me, C is actually only rarely useful.
Edit, because people seem to be offended by the suggestion that the system they don’t use is more practical in a very specific context:
What you are used to is definitely best for you, but I’m talking about the general practicality and usefulness in specific contexts. C in the context of states of water makes sense, and is practical and useful. F in the context of weather makes sense, because 0 to 100 is just normal weather in places with four seasons. In the context of weather, it is both practical and useful. K is practical and useful in pretty much every scientific context. To say memorizing -17 to 38 vs memorizing 0 to 100 is the same is silly, because 0 and 100 are very meaningful to the human mind. Of course, what you are used to will be what your mind immediately goes to, it does not change the fact that 0°F to 100°F for weather is more understandable, 0°C to 100°C for freezing and boiling water is more understandable, and 0°K being truly no thermal energy with units the same size as C is better for scientific contexts.
In my opinion C and F are equally good for everyday use. Neither is better than the other. Although C is more “scientific” than F, it’s still a very much arbitrary scale at the end of the day. Knowing water freezes at 0C is not different at all than knowing it freezes at 32F for the purposes of knowing you might have ice on the road. Knowing 35C is hot weather is no different than 100F. The human mind can adapt to each of them just as easily as the other. Neither of them makes your life harder or easier than the other.
For normal weather, 0°F to 100°F is easier to understand than -17°C to 38°C. Just like 0°C for freezing water and 100°C for boiling water is easier to remember. It’s just how our brains work. We like nice round numbers. Plus, there’s a higher fidelity between 0 and 100 than between -17 and 38.
Easier to understand FOR YOU.
There is a reason only 3 countries is the whole world use the imperial system of measurement.
What is easier than “over 100 dangerous; under 0 dangerous”?
Below 0 ice, above 0 no ice
That goes in line with what I was saying. F makes sense for weather, and not much else. C makes sense for states of water, and not much else.
F is just random and some people are used to it, and then try to assign meaning to the random points. Why should the temperature of a horse have any relation with the weather?
It doesn’t, but it just at happens that those two arbitrary temperatures are very good lower and upper bounds for safe weather.
It really makes no real difference for everyday use. The higher resolution of the scale is not relevant at all for deciding what to wear outside. It takes no time at all for your brain to adjust to either one of them. 38 becomes no different to you than a nice round 100.
What you are used to is definitely best for you, but I’m talking about the general practicality and usefulness in specific contexts. C in the context of states of water makes sense, and is practical and useful. F in the context of weather makes sense, because 0 to 100 is just normal weather in places with four seasons. In the context of weather, it is both practical and useful. K is practical and useful in pretty much every scientific context.
Why would anyone care about -17°C? It is an arbitrary number without any relevance. The only relevance it has to you is if you think in Fahrenheit where it is an arbitrary zero point. Not even 38°C is a number you frequently hear used, unless its seriously hot and it happens to be the ambient temperature. Human body temperature is more relevant, but it isn’t a round number in either of the measurement systems, nor is it identical between individuals either.
That “higher fidelity” argument just makes me wonder if some people don’t know the decimal system. 22.7°C, there you go. Most people don’t need that level of precision but it if they do, they simply add a position after the comma and are done with it.
Until they have a fever, then 38.1 and 38.9 can be significant.
I have the impression you don’t know how rounding works. The two temperatures you quote would be different even with only full numbers.
In any case, for the case of body temperature, you do exactly that, use as many positions after the comma as you want. (Usually more the one is pointless though as you can reliably measure that anyway)
I mean it’s easier if you get used to using it. If you just use Celsius then it’s confusing and counterintuitive
In physics maybe but plenty of scientific fields where your temperatures are commonly not superfreezing. Using K just bloats up your numbers then, without any benefit. In case you ever need K, just add 273.15 to the temperature in °C. The only difference is the base, the increments are the same. Fahrenheit is much less compatible with Kelvin.