nrellis666 it caused me to stop the video and look for comments on the subject... like this one! I'd've probably like it better if the original phrase hadn't come from a former (thank God, Yahweh, Allah, Brahma, Buddha, FSM, and all the rest) president of the USA.
Brady! I love this channel! Normally you walk through museums and have little idea what you're looking at. You could literally do a million episodes on this channel. Keep it up!
Nillie I guess that's not much of a problem, imagine how hard would it be to get an exact second in a hurry, you would need the exact gravity and everything!
Mass destruction, that was an amazing joke. Keith's reaction had to be what made the joke worthwhile though, seeing his jaw drop, a moment of hesitation, then going "hoh boy, I wasn't expecting one of 'those' jokes, game face disrupted." XD
It's rare you see a video with close to 1000 likes and no dislikes and this video definitely deserves that. Keep up all the good work Brady, love this channel and all your others!
3:29 Keith's laugh is absolutely delightful. He projects such an air of sophistication and composure (despite his constant barrage of puns) that it caught me entirely off guard.
This was my favorite yet! I really get a kick out of standard measures. There's something about the fact that if you were to alter the object you'd be redefining every reference to it in the world.
Brady, I have to admit that when you first described this channel, I did not get it and thought it was going to be lame. But, you find and talk about the most fascinating things on it. Thank you for coming up with this...
This was fascinating to watch! Very few people have the experience of seeing what standard weights and measures look like. You video makes seeing this possible. Thank you!
The look on Keith's face as he was unscrewing that. That's the look of someone truly in love with science and history. I'm somewhat jealous of the both of you.
how many years do we have to wait for another 'objectivity' type channel for all these things to come out and be appreciated again? seems like we are going to keep needing channels like this every 100-200 years or for every time youtube gets replaced haha
I love reference standards. The sense of awe in knowing "this is what it is, exactly," can only be stated for these unique items. It would give me chills to have been in Brady's place. At the same time it's crazy to think that these standards are anything fundamentally special since we just made them up to be what they are. When teaching physics labs, I always walked around with a wooden meter stick. It gave me a sense of "doing science" and was useful to have as a measure, a pointer, and a disciplinary tool. Heh, heh! My closest brushes with standards fame are driving by the National Institute of Standards and Technology laboratory in Boulder, Colorado, where the NIST-F1 cesium fountain atomic clock is located, and attending a presentation by Nobel laureate and former Secretary of Energy, Stephen Chu, who developed the laser cooling of atoms technology used in the NIST-F1.
Whether these standard weights and measures are relevant in the present or not, they still have a very interesting history and tell us a lot about our past. And some, like the troy pound, are also visually appealing.
this is all so interesting... i recall reading about standards for weights and measures over 50 years ago back in elementary school - and here, well, well, well - here it is... thanx.
There should be documentation for every time an object has been used, that way we can measure how interest in certain objects behaves overtime, as well as getting a situation in 200 years from know of somebody writing down "20/november/2221, used document of used documents of used documents to check at which level the fractal had grown in the past years since it's creation, the document was returned immediately".
Great video! It's pretty interesting that it has its own special fork to be picked up. The "mass destruction" joke was funny but it was Keith's "Oh dear" that made me lose it haha :-)
I know the Uk is supposed to be metric, but everywhere the old imperial measures are still in use... as a result, in the UK, what are the primary measures for these imperial measures, or are they referenced back to the SI units, as NIST does?
Often an easy way to get something threaded started is to put the pieces together, rotate one piece (such as that cap) as if you're loosening just it until it "clicks," then screw it in the tightening direction. Funny story about how I learned that...one summer I worked for a carnival game where their setup had stools on a piece of threaded, galvanized, heavy pipe, in turn screwed into a base board. While putting that together one morning, one of the other carnies in my crew taught me that nugget of wisdom I've been using ever since. Who knew you could learn such useful life lessons from a minimum wage summer job?
Again, great video! It would be interesting to see who the last person was to use these standards for scientific purposes and to know why they needed them.
It's amazing to think about how many interesting things museums have stored away. Things nobody has really looked at for hundreds of years, might get looked at once, but put away for presumably hundreds more. The Smithsonian only displays less than 2 percent of what they have. Thats a lotta cool junk
Was 62.10 degrees determined after the cast was made or was the cast made such the 62.10 degrees was the required temp? For the earlier case, what was used to determine this, and in the later, why 62.10 degrees?
Objectivity Oh sorry, I worded that badly. I mean was there anything special about the metal supports? Why were they there at all? I expected the box to just be lined with some felt or cork, but then saw a whole lot of complicated metal.
So if someone were to say, shave of 1/4 of an inch of the standard yard, would all other instruments based on that need to be adjusted to the new yard length?
A question on the dimensions of the rod. while the length is a standard yard is the dimension of the rod in the other 2 dimensions as well a standard inch?
I kind of cringed when Brady didn't first reverse screw the troy pound lid. The clicks and scratches afterwards, probably caused by the threads forcibly realigning, were killer too.
I'm afraid I'm stuck on 62.1°F. It seems a fairly random figure, is there some simple chemistry or physics trick to achieve this temperature accurately?
When you said exactly a yard my first thought was how fast are you moving relative to me. Second thought was what temperature is it in that room. Seems like those thoughts should have come the other way round. Especially since temperature would (normally) have a bigger effect. BTW,, at what temperature is that exactly a yard? I wonder if it comes up later in the video...
Is the Yard the distance of the end faces of the bar ? Or is it the distance between 2 engraved Lines on the bar as it is on the original Meter in Paris ?
From Wikipedia: "Bronze Yard №11 was forged to be an exact copy of the British Imperial Standard Yard held by Parliament. Both are line standards: the yard was defined by the distance at 62°F between two fine lines drawn on gold plugs (closeup, top) installed in recesses near each end of the bar."
You would think they would have remade some of these with Invar (metal that doesn't practically change in heat) in the past. The Invar alloy was discovered in 1896.
Meanwhile, all the standard metric weights and measures are in England's long lasted enemy's hands : France. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bureau_of_Weights_and_Measures
So, why isn't The Yard on a display somewhere? It would be an interesting object to think about. And it is not like they use it to standardize all other yardsticks so it must be guarded (like the protokilogram), the man hiself told you that he never opened the box before. So what is the point in hiding it in some bunker?
Green Silver ! believe it's because platinum is even more inert than gold, so it corrodes less from contact with air, hence staying more accurate throughout the ages.
Green Silver Platinum is much more rigid than gold and is also denser. When scratched, gold will 'flake' off on a microscropic level while platinum will remain bonded to itself. As the video shows, platinum can be scratched and removed, but it takes a solvent like mercury to do so.
Despite its being JUST a standard yard, Brady, you should have had a better looks at the standard yard bar as you know - it's a once in 150 years event! ;) Hoping for extra footage to have a better close-up camera shots on it. :D
Well these all *used* to be exactly a yard, troy pound, pound,.... Nowadays(since the Weights and Measures Act of 1963) "the yard" is exactly 0.9144 meters, and a pound 0.45359237Kg. The troy pound is exactly 31.1034768 g.
Wemja No, the kilogram is about. 2.2046 pounds. You cannot define other units from the standard kilogram because the various standard kilograms no longer have the same mass. The metric system has not, and will replace the standard system.
Andrew Nichols You have no idea what you are talking about. How do you think the weight of a pound is calibrated ? They both came down to a block of metal somewhere in a vault. Originally the kilogram was supposed to be the same weight as 1 liter water. As methods of measuring became more precise they had to find a better way. The only reason the kilogram is used as the standard is because its mass is more acuratly calculated and its more used Soon the kilogram will be calculated according to Avogadro's constant once it has been completely defined. This is the most accurate way of defining mass that we currently have. And you are right that the kilogram is about 2.2046 pound. I am right when I say a pound is exactly 0.45359237 kg. when the mass of the kilogram is calculated more precise the pound changes with it.
The standard system of measurements is a far superior measuring system. It was around long before the metric system, and will be around long after the metric system disappears. When butter, for example, is sold with metric units, it is sold not in a round kilogram, or half kilogram, but .454 kilograms. It is sold in round pounds. Why? Because the standard system provides more convenient sized units for human scale objects. Base 12 and 16 are also much easier to work with than base 10. Science and Engineering can use either system equally well, but for average day-to-day activities, the standard system is still the obvious choice. The standard system remains the defacto standard. We notate distances on roads in miles, not in kilometers (except in a few locations), we sell food and drink in pounds, gallons, and ounces (again, with a few exceptions), our military still uses standard units (few exceptions again), and the sports we watch use standard units. The metric system had its chance a few decades ago, but the US realized it is an inferior system and ignored it. The UK is realizing its mistake and there is a movement to bring back the standard system over there too. I suspect the same is true of all countries that were forced to switch to the metric system. If the kilogram is redefined (unlikely) the only way that will affect the pound-mass is the conversion factor will be adjusted.
The man said he has never opened that box and he has probably been caring for these items most of his life....and you didn't let him lift the thing out of the box? damn thats cold hahaha
Come on brady! Get out your measuring tape and verify its the yard. Or have him explain how you get the bar to 62.10 (F) and then do it! I'll have to check out some more of this channel, but there are many things I want to see like the famous Cavendish experiment which determined the Gravitational Constant.
Penny Lane I don't think they exist as volume is constructed from distances. You only need 7 standard base units to establish a system of measure. All other units are constructed or derived from those 7 units.
Penny Lane In the modern SI system, the meter is defined using the second, and from there you only cube the meter to get cubic meters, a unit of volume. There is no separate standard of volume.
+Penny Lane A standard volume can be constructed, but there is no point as volume is constructed from length. You can examine the Wikipedia article on SI derived units.
It is, for many reasons. 1. The metric system only uses base 10. Base ten can only be divided into a half and a tenth. Most measurements of the standard system use base 12 or 16 (or occasionally 60), which can be divided into eighths, quarters, thirds, halves, and many more for base 60. Winner, Standard. 2. The scale of units is usually more convenient for the item being measured. It is more convenient to measure, say, a hand in inches than in meters or millimeters. Also, an appropriate unit can be chosen such as refrigeration ton, BTU, ft-lbf, or calorie (all of which are of greatly different sizes), whereas in the metric system you can only use the joule or the now depreciated erg, no matter what the scale or context you are applying the measurement too. Winner, Standard. 3. For normal, everyday human-scale human interactions, the standard system is superior for reasons 1 and 2 above. In science and engineering either system can be used just as easily. I have an engineering background and the math works either way. Therefore, winner yet again is Standard. The overall winner is Standard. Also, if you look at history you see that the standard system has roots in ancient Babylon over four thousand years ago. The Egyptian pyramids were measured in feet. The Roman empire built their roads in miles. NASA put men on the moon using the American standard system, which is an as yet matched feat of engineering. The metric system was created in France a little over two hundred years ago, and Napoleon Bonaparte forced it on those nations he conquered. Other nations since then have had the metric system forced on them by their own governments. Also, every socialist/communist government ever has used the metric system.
Andrew Nichols 1. Base ten is the selling point of the metric system, because is makes it easy to switch from one unit to the other. Can you tell me, out of the blue, how many inches there are in one and a quarter mile? In the metric system that is a piece of cake thanks to base ten conversions. Your point that it can only be divided in half and a tenth is rubbish. 10 divided by 4 for instance is just 2,5 and nobody has difficulty with that, same goes for 3 and 8. 2. Both systems use very arbitrary values for their system. I don't have a problem with the length of an inch, I have a problem with the way the inch relates to other units. There the bases are all over the place, there is no order, making conversions difficult. It just depends on what you are brought up with for convenience and how you relate one to the other. For the hand measurement for instance you can use centimetres, just as easy as an inch. For every day use some units of the metric systems are easier and for other the imperial system. But again not my point, my point is that the superiority of the metric systems is base ten and how different units relate to each other. 3. For scientific use the metric system is most easy, thats why every scientist, including Americans, use the metric system. Convert for instance volume to surface area in imperial units, that gets messy quickly with the imperial system. NASA put stuf on Mars using the metric system, a more incredible feat that the moon in my opinion. However, not a sound argument, if someone put a human on planet X using the most ridiculous system of measurement we will not say that that system is therefore superior. The US is the most advanced space nation and they happen to use the imperial system but these are not related. In your last argument you really make a fool out of yourself. I could say an equally diabolical thing by saying that every slave trading nation used the imperial system, therefore the imperial system is rubbish.
So, if I have 12 eggs and and three friends, we can all, evenly, get three eggs. If I had only ten, we can't divide evenly. How does someone get a half-egg? That doesn't make sense. Same goes for the foot, or the pound-mass. 1/3 of 12 is 4, 1/3 of 10 is 0.333333..... Also, as I was taught in school, the centimeter is an officially depreciated unit in the metric system. Given I live in a free country and I am not forced to use the metric system, I don't have practical experience. In school (including my engineering classes) when we used the metric system we only used meters. Also, if the base 10 metric system really is superior, why do even metric countries still use base 60 time? Base 10 metric time does exist, but no one uses it. In the realm of science and engineering the standard system and the metric system are equal. Math doesn't care if you are using feet or joules or mickeys (yes, mickeys are an actual unit of measurement). My argument is that in the realm of everyday interactions (at the supermarket, for example) it is a lot easier to work with 12 or 16 than 10. Your statement about converting surface area to volume is actually nonsense. Converting an area to a volume is meaningless in either system. Surface area is a distance squared, volume is a distance cubed. Multiplying an area by another distance does give a volume (and works equally well in both systems) but this is not a conversion. 1 square foot times 1 foot is one cubic foot, just as 1 square meter times one 1 meter is 1 cubic meter. This is similar to another mistake I see in television (and movies) from metric countries, when they say something weighs X grams. Nothing weighs any grams. Grams do not measure weight, they measure mass. In the metric system things weigh X newtons. In the standard system things have a mass measurable in pounds-mass and have a weight in pounds-force (or slugs), although since these mean the same in Earths surface gravity, we usually just say pounds. Also, a subtle point. The standard system is not the same as the imperial system. Some of the units are of slightly different sizes. The imperial system was established to facilitate trade within the British empire in 1824, after the US broke away. So, technically your argument that all slave trading nations (which unfortunately includes the US) is wrong.
Mass destruction has to be one of the best puns I've ever heard
nrellis666 I agree!
nrellis666 oh deah
nrellis666 it caused me to stop the video and look for comments on the subject... like this one! I'd've probably like it better if the original phrase hadn't come from a former (thank God, Yahweh, Allah, Brahma, Buddha, FSM, and all the rest) president of the USA.
+nrellis666 A weapon of maths instruction?
That was excellent, but the 12 year old inside of me was equally amused by the specification of 62.1 Fahᵗ
I liked the mass destruction joke :(
dashn64 It was a massive success...
dashn64 But it's a heavy joke
The One But you can't lose mass... it can only be a massive failure. :P
dashn64 Oh dear : )
dashn64 hahaha it was a good one, but mass is not the same as weight
Brady! I love this channel! Normally you walk through museums and have little idea what you're looking at. You could literally do a million episodes on this channel. Keep it up!
oisiaa glad you are liking it - we are having fun making it. - Brady
That's not just a yardstick, it's _the_ yardstick.
At 62.10 F, though...
Aditya Khanna So assuming that it was not 61.1°F in the room, we didn't actually see a yard measure...and back in the box it goes.
Nillie I guess that's not much of a problem, imagine how hard would it be to get an exact second in a hurry, you would need the exact gravity and everything!
RealSpaceModels Yup! It is somewhere near 18C which is the temperature in UK currently... So it's a maybe may-not-be thing
juan arias No, you need a caesium atom and something to help you count the periods of the transition frequency of the outermost electron.
Mass destruction, that was an amazing joke. Keith's reaction had to be what made the joke worthwhile though, seeing his jaw drop, a moment of hesitation, then going "hoh boy, I wasn't expecting one of 'those' jokes, game face disrupted." XD
I pray every night so Brady never drops anything on this videos
Antonio Latte I do too. The call of the void
call of the jerk*
Rocky1OOcall of the postbox*
Antonio L as opposed to Linus Sebastian who always drops something in his videos
This show is the yardstick by which all other cool science videos are measured.
Science videos hardly ever mention yards
Lucas Cottica Silveira -.-
This has become my favorite of Brady's channels.
It's rare you see a video with close to 1000 likes and no dislikes and this video definitely deserves that. Keep up all the good work Brady, love this channel and all your others!
Brilliant new Objectivity video: this time it's the collection of standard measures and weights!
3:29 Keith's laugh is absolutely delightful. He projects such an air of sophistication and composure (despite his constant barrage of puns) that it caught me entirely off guard.
i can't believe you didn't take a tape measure to it!
This channel needs about 5 million more subs.
Ionlymadethistoleavecoments agreed - can you help?
what are you proposing?
Ionlymadethistoleavecoments Subscribe with all your accounts. Duh.
This was my favorite yet! I really get a kick out of standard measures. There's something about the fact that if you were to alter the object you'd be redefining every reference to it in the world.
like cleaning weights with mercury...
He's not allowed to show you the box where the Standard Second is kept; it's only trotted out when a leap second is needed.
Thank you for shooting these videos. It is great seeing these objects.
"Would that be an example of 'mass' distraction? 😁"
"Oh dear..."
That was perfect!
"Dumb dumbs," I laughed so hard and desire my life's work to be reduced to a pithy insult.
i can't even comprehend how much interesting stuff Keith must have that he didn't even look inside the box of the standard yard.
Brady, I have to admit that when you first described this channel, I did not get it and thought it was going to be lame. But, you find and talk about the most fascinating things on it. Thank you for coming up with this...
Jeff Chamberlain cool - glad you are enjoying it. we are too. - Brady
This was fascinating to watch! Very few people have the experience of seeing what standard weights and measures look like. You video makes seeing this possible. Thank you!
What a fantastic series this is. Thanks.
This almost brought a tear to my eyes.
Is Standard Yard anything like Scotland Yard?
Mara K We've always done things differently up here.
The look on Keith's face as he was unscrewing that. That's the look of someone truly in love with science and history. I'm somewhat jealous of the both of you.
how many years do we have to wait for another 'objectivity' type channel for all these things to come out and be appreciated again? seems like we are going to keep needing channels like this every 100-200 years or for every time youtube gets replaced haha
I love reference standards. The sense of awe in knowing "this is what it is, exactly," can only be stated for these unique items. It would give me chills to have been in Brady's place. At the same time it's crazy to think that these standards are anything fundamentally special since we just made them up to be what they are. When teaching physics labs, I always walked around with a wooden meter stick. It gave me a sense of "doing science" and was useful to have as a measure, a pointer, and a disciplinary tool. Heh, heh!
My closest brushes with standards fame are driving by the National Institute of Standards and Technology laboratory in Boulder, Colorado, where the NIST-F1 cesium fountain atomic clock is located, and attending a presentation by Nobel laureate and former Secretary of Energy, Stephen Chu, who developed the laser cooling of atoms technology used in the NIST-F1.
I love this series so much!! Thank you for sharing!
Whether these standard weights and measures are relevant in the present or not, they still have a very interesting history and tell us a lot about our past. And some, like the troy pound, are also visually appealing.
this is all so interesting... i recall reading about standards for weights and measures over 50 years ago back in elementary school - and here, well, well, well - here it is... thanx.
There should be documentation for every time an object has been used, that way we can measure how interest in certain objects behaves overtime, as well as getting a situation in 200 years from know of somebody writing down "20/november/2221, used document of used documents of used documents to check at which level the fractal had grown in the past years since it's creation, the document was returned immediately".
"How long do you think this is?"
*glances at title*
I've got an idea.
Just discovered this channel so late to the party but I cant believe you didnt measure it!!!
Nice to see Keith laughing. More bad jokes Brady!
I love the pun "mass distraction" had me laughing along with Brady and Keith.
These videos are amazing Brady, thank you so much for making these!
(Also thank you to the Royal Society of course :) )
Great video! It's pretty interesting that it has its own special fork to be picked up.
The "mass destruction" joke was funny but it was Keith's "Oh dear" that made me lose it haha :-)
This gentleman might be the most english man I've ever seen. And that is absolutely fantastic.
Best video yet
I loveeeee this channel!!
That effing joke!!! damn Brady!!! hahahaha
I know the Uk is supposed to be metric, but everywhere the old imperial measures are still in use... as a result, in the UK, what are the primary measures for these imperial measures, or are they referenced back to the SI units, as NIST does?
Oh my God, my illusions shattered. Brady Haran, hero to nerds everywhere, isn't a true Whovian. Imagine him not knowing how to pronounce Troughton!
I'm disappointed, Brady.
you didn't link to Dirk's video on the standard kilo...
Brady now has a scientific pun
to go with his 'Brady sequence' - Numberphile
Often an easy way to get something threaded started is to put the pieces together, rotate one piece (such as that cap) as if you're loosening just it until it "clicks," then screw it in the tightening direction.
Funny story about how I learned that...one summer I worked for a carnival game where their setup had stools on a piece of threaded, galvanized, heavy pipe, in turn screwed into a base board. While putting that together one morning, one of the other carnies in my crew taught me that nugget of wisdom I've been using ever since. Who knew you could learn such useful life lessons from a minimum wage summer job?
Again, great video! It would be interesting to see who the last person was to use these standards for scientific purposes and to know why they needed them.
I love these videos.
It's amazing to think about how many interesting things museums have stored away. Things nobody has really looked at for hundreds of years, might get looked at once, but put away for presumably hundreds more.
The Smithsonian only displays less than 2 percent of what they have. Thats a lotta cool junk
"Mass destruction"! Well done!
How is there not more views on this channel
....that little Troy Pound weight is equal to about 13 ounces which places its value in Platinum at about $15,000
MASS DESTRUCTION I HAD TO PAUSE THE VIDEO I LAUGHED SO HARD
Make brady a honorary librarian of the royal society!
Was 62.10 degrees determined after the cast was made or was the cast made such the 62.10 degrees was the required temp? For the earlier case, what was used to determine this, and in the later, why 62.10 degrees?
It seems B & K are having weigh too much fun here .... But as always, a MASS-ter piece of a show! Oh dear, bad punning is catching, isn't it...?
It would be cool to have another video about the Standard kilogram or the standard meter, like the standard SI units!
What was in the box? The metal supports inside that the yard was placed upon?
Phoenixlore yes
Objectivity Oh sorry, I worded that badly. I mean was there anything special about the metal supports? Why were they there at all? I expected the box to just be lined with some felt or cork, but then saw a whole lot of complicated metal.
The mass destruction joke caused mass hysteria.
This is an interesting video, that joke was brilliant.
I love this channel :D
Piper Isle me too
So if someone were to say, shave of 1/4 of an inch of the standard yard, would all other instruments based on that need to be adjusted to the new yard length?
A question on the dimensions of the rod. while the length is a standard yard is the dimension of the rod in the other 2 dimensions as well a standard inch?
Incredible picture of Herschel there. Makes him look like a man who is all business and don't care about fame or other nonsense.
I kind of cringed when Brady didn't first reverse screw the troy pound lid. The clicks and scratches afterwards, probably caused by the threads forcibly realigning, were killer too.
I'm afraid I'm stuck on 62.1°F. It seems a fairly random figure, is there some simple chemistry or physics trick to achieve this temperature accurately?
brocktechnology why you doing science in farenheight
When you said exactly a yard my first thought was how fast are you moving relative to me. Second thought was what temperature is it in that room. Seems like those thoughts should have come the other way round. Especially since temperature would (normally) have a bigger effect. BTW,, at what temperature is that exactly a yard? I wonder if it comes up later in the video...
So cool objects as usual. I love the joke of mass destruction.
I'd like to know how the arrived at the length. They compared it to what? Did they just guess?
1351 likes and 1 dislike. Only brady can get these ratios.
Is the Yard the distance of the end faces of the bar ? Or is it the distance between 2 engraved Lines on the bar as it is on the original Meter in Paris ?
Or is it between (or across) pins in the two holes?
From Wikipedia: "Bronze Yard №11 was forged to be an exact copy of the British Imperial Standard Yard held by Parliament. Both are line standards: the yard was defined by the distance at 62°F between two fine lines drawn on gold plugs (closeup, top) installed in recesses near each end of the bar."
this kind of thing is really my bag, baby!
My left ear enjoyed this.
That joke was too good.
How busy are the archives there on a regular basis?
"...Dumb Dumbs..."
You would think they would have remade some of these with Invar (metal that doesn't practically change in heat) in the past. The Invar alloy was discovered in 1896.
Can you make an appointment to the royal society? I'd love to come if I were to travel to Great Britain.
I love Keith’s face :)
The box of the standard yard was interesting
Meanwhile, all the standard metric weights and measures are in England's long lasted enemy's hands : France. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bureau_of_Weights_and_Measures
Maybe you should (on another channel) make videos about how ancient weights and measures got their first definition.
That troy pound of platinum is worth $12630, disregarding it's historical importance and just going by the commodity price.
And at today's spot price $12,843.19 - up over $200 in 3 months.
Jonathan Chappell 12 grand? damn
So, why isn't The Yard on a display somewhere? It would be an interesting object to think about. And it is not like they use it to standardize all other yardsticks so it must be guarded (like the protokilogram), the man hiself told you that he never opened the box before. So what is the point in hiding it in some bunker?
Brady failed to pretend he didn't pick it up without the fork the first time XD
How many words with Ps in them did he say in the direction of the pound?
brady usually makes really shit annoying jokes but I've to admit it was a good laugh @ "mass destruction"
Is there a Mr. Baily's Metal No. 1 and 2?
So a platinum lb must be better than a gold lb? Why? (Not meaning monetary values)
Green Silver ! believe it's because platinum is even more inert than gold, so it corrodes less from contact with air, hence staying more accurate throughout the ages.
Green Silver Platinum is much more rigid than gold and is also denser. When scratched, gold will 'flake' off on a microscropic level while platinum will remain bonded to itself. As the video shows, platinum can be scratched and removed, but it takes a solvent like mercury to do so.
How much trouble would you be in if you dropped and broke the yardstick?
I wonder how much that troy ounce weight is worth just for the platinum alone.
I was ready for they showing a preserved thumb for the standard inch.
Despite its being JUST a standard yard, Brady, you should have had a better looks at the standard yard bar as you know - it's a once in 150 years event! ;) Hoping for extra footage to have a better close-up camera shots on it. :D
I wonder what vision will greet the Yard, next time it sees the light of day...
Can you guys upload more frequently please
Well these all *used* to be exactly a yard, troy pound, pound,....
Nowadays(since the Weights and Measures Act of 1963) "the yard" is exactly 0.9144 meters, and a pound 0.45359237Kg. The troy pound is exactly 31.1034768 g.
Wemja a pound is 0.453592 kg
a2STRAY yea I copy pasted the wrong number. It is fixed now.What you said is not exact, you rounded down the last 2 digits.
Wemja No, the kilogram is about. 2.2046 pounds. You cannot define other units from the standard kilogram because the various standard kilograms no longer have the same mass. The metric system has not, and will replace the standard system.
Andrew Nichols You have no idea what you are talking about.
How do you think the weight of a pound is calibrated ? They both came down to a block of metal somewhere in a vault.
Originally the kilogram was supposed to be the same weight as 1 liter water.
As methods of measuring became more precise they had to find a better way.
The only reason the kilogram is used as the standard is because its mass is more acuratly calculated and its more used
Soon the kilogram will be calculated according to Avogadro's constant once it has been completely defined.
This is the most accurate way of defining mass that we currently have.
And you are right that the kilogram is about 2.2046 pound.
I am right when I say a pound is exactly 0.45359237 kg.
when the mass of the kilogram is calculated more precise the pound changes with it.
The standard system of measurements is a far superior measuring system. It was around long before the metric system, and will be around long after the metric system disappears. When butter, for example, is sold with metric units, it is sold not in a round kilogram, or half kilogram, but .454 kilograms. It is sold in round pounds. Why? Because the standard system provides more convenient sized units for human scale objects. Base 12 and 16 are also much easier to work with than base 10. Science and Engineering can use either system equally well, but for average day-to-day activities, the standard system is still the obvious choice.
The standard system remains the defacto standard. We notate distances on roads in miles, not in kilometers (except in a few locations), we sell food and drink in pounds, gallons, and ounces (again, with a few exceptions), our military still uses standard units (few exceptions again), and the sports we watch use standard units. The metric system had its chance a few decades ago, but the US realized it is an inferior system and ignored it. The UK is realizing its mistake and there is a movement to bring back the standard system over there too. I suspect the same is true of all countries that were forced to switch to the metric system.
If the kilogram is redefined (unlikely) the only way that will affect the pound-mass is the conversion factor will be adjusted.
The man said he has never opened that box and he has probably been caring for these items most of his life....and you didn't let him lift the thing out of the box? damn thats cold hahaha
Come on brady! Get out your measuring tape and verify its the yard. Or have him explain how you get the bar to 62.10 (F) and then do it!
I'll have to check out some more of this channel, but there are many things I want to see like the famous Cavendish experiment which determined the Gravitational Constant.
I've seen standard meters and standard kilos before but I'd really like to see a standard unit of volume.
Penny Lane I don't think they exist as volume is constructed from distances. You only need 7 standard base units to establish a system of measure. All other units are constructed or derived from those 7 units.
IsYitzach I've heard differently.
Penny Lane Volume is just distance cubed.
Penny Lane In the modern SI system, the meter is defined using the second, and from there you only cube the meter to get cubic meters, a unit of volume. There is no separate standard of volume.
+Penny Lane A standard volume can be constructed, but there is no point as volume is constructed from length. You can examine the Wikipedia article on SI derived units.
5:51 - 6:06
WE,THE COMMIES,GONNA GET YOU FIRST,*YARD*.
(Im brazilian,before someone asks gently).
How long? 0.9144 meters
Corthez Blake The standard system is superior to the metric system, therefore yards are superior to meters.
Andrew Nichols No it isn't
It is, for many reasons.
1. The metric system only uses base 10. Base ten can only be divided into a half and a tenth. Most measurements of the standard system use base 12 or 16 (or occasionally 60), which can be divided into eighths, quarters, thirds, halves, and many more for base 60. Winner, Standard.
2. The scale of units is usually more convenient for the item being measured. It is more convenient to measure, say, a hand in inches than in meters or millimeters. Also, an appropriate unit can be chosen such as refrigeration ton, BTU, ft-lbf, or calorie (all of which are of greatly different sizes), whereas in the metric system you can only use the joule or the now depreciated erg, no matter what the scale or context you are applying the measurement too. Winner, Standard.
3. For normal, everyday human-scale human interactions, the standard system is superior for reasons 1 and 2 above. In science and engineering either system can be used just as easily. I have an engineering background and the math works either way. Therefore, winner yet again is Standard.
The overall winner is Standard.
Also, if you look at history you see that the standard system has roots in ancient Babylon over four thousand years ago. The Egyptian pyramids were measured in feet. The Roman empire built their roads in miles. NASA put men on the moon using the American standard system, which is an as yet matched feat of engineering. The metric system was created in France a little over two hundred years ago, and Napoleon Bonaparte forced it on those nations he conquered. Other nations since then have had the metric system forced on them by their own governments. Also, every socialist/communist government ever has used the metric system.
Andrew Nichols 1. Base ten is the selling point of the metric system, because is makes it easy to switch from one unit to the other. Can you tell me, out of the blue, how many inches there are in one and a quarter mile? In the metric system that is a piece of cake thanks to base ten conversions. Your point that it can only be divided in half and a tenth is rubbish. 10 divided by 4 for instance is just 2,5 and nobody has difficulty with that, same goes for 3 and 8.
2. Both systems use very arbitrary values for their system. I don't have a problem with the length of an inch, I have a problem with the way the inch relates to other units. There the bases are all over the place, there is no order, making conversions difficult. It just depends on what you are brought up with for convenience and how you relate one to the other. For the hand measurement for instance you can use centimetres, just as easy as an inch. For every day use some units of the metric systems are easier and for other the imperial system. But again not my point, my point is that the superiority of the metric systems is base ten and how different units relate to each other.
3. For scientific use the metric system is most easy, thats why every scientist, including Americans, use the metric system. Convert for instance volume to surface area in imperial units, that gets messy quickly with the imperial system. NASA put stuf on Mars using the metric system, a more incredible feat that the moon in my opinion. However, not a sound argument, if someone put a human on planet X using the most ridiculous system of measurement we will not say that that system is therefore superior. The US is the most advanced space nation and they happen to use the imperial system but these are not related. In your last argument you really make a fool out of yourself. I could say an equally diabolical thing by saying that every slave trading nation used the imperial system, therefore the imperial system is rubbish.
So, if I have 12 eggs and and three friends, we can all, evenly, get three eggs. If I had only ten, we can't divide evenly. How does someone get a half-egg? That doesn't make sense. Same goes for the foot, or the pound-mass. 1/3 of 12 is 4, 1/3 of 10 is 0.333333..... Also, as I was taught in school, the centimeter is an officially depreciated unit in the metric system. Given I live in a free country and I am not forced to use the metric system, I don't have practical experience. In school (including my engineering classes) when we used the metric system we only used meters. Also, if the base 10 metric system really is superior, why do even metric countries still use base 60 time? Base 10 metric time does exist, but no one uses it.
In the realm of science and engineering the standard system and the metric system are equal. Math doesn't care if you are using feet or joules or mickeys (yes, mickeys are an actual unit of measurement). My argument is that in the realm of everyday interactions (at the supermarket, for example) it is a lot easier to work with 12 or 16 than 10.
Your statement about converting surface area to volume is actually nonsense. Converting an area to a volume is meaningless in either system. Surface area is a distance squared, volume is a distance cubed. Multiplying an area by another distance does give a volume (and works equally well in both systems) but this is not a conversion. 1 square foot times 1 foot is one cubic foot, just as 1 square meter times one 1 meter is 1 cubic meter. This is similar to another mistake I see in television (and movies) from metric countries, when they say something weighs X grams. Nothing weighs any grams. Grams do not measure weight, they measure mass. In the metric system things weigh X newtons. In the standard system things have a mass measurable in pounds-mass and have a weight in pounds-force (or slugs), although since these mean the same in Earths surface gravity, we usually just say pounds.
Also, a subtle point. The standard system is not the same as the imperial system. Some of the units are of slightly different sizes. The imperial system was established to facilitate trade within the British empire in 1824, after the US broke away. So, technically your argument that all slave trading nations (which unfortunately includes the US) is wrong.