People attach their feelings of reference to the scale they are used to. No one except americans could say that farenheit is intuitive to the body. If you grew up with celsius, that’s your point of reference.
People like conceptualizing things on a 0-100 scale. That's part of the entire premise of celcius and what op is referring to. 0-100F is approximately typical outdoor temperatures or what humans are used to feeling. 0-100C is a scale focused on the state of water.
I have a problem with the whole stupid phrase OP used.
Yes, Farenheit encompasses far more typical outside teperatures in it’s 0-100 than Celsius. But not enough to make sense, or be of use. The matter of perspective, the entire thing I was referring to, is still present, as there are plenty places where the apparently fabled 0-100 with farenheit does not hold, thus negating the whole appeal of it.
So let’s assume 0-100 is somehow a golden standard we need to abide by.
0-100 is just numbers, they all are, and we can get used to any of them, depending on how we are exposed to them, which is my point. Now, the 0-100 farenheit offers, which is supposed to be ”how humans feel”, does not even succeed to encompass that.
0-100 with water more or less stays the same. And how water works, is pretty important for human function outdoors.
As a bonus, 0-100 is not a relevant scale with Kelvin.
Moreover, while Kelvin and Celsius are connected and applied, Farenheit has no use in modern science.
The whole phrase OP used is just meant to make Farenheit seem the most ”human” and logical. As a matter of speech it sounds fun, but fails to actually hold up value for all parties.
3
u/Orielsamus 2h ago
People attach their feelings of reference to the scale they are used to. No one except americans could say that farenheit is intuitive to the body. If you grew up with celsius, that’s your point of reference.