Most desired Sci-Fi Invention

[Nate the Great]

I don't see anyone defending Farenheit. I think that normal day-to-day temperatures are better represented in it, but that's another discussion.

After putting a little thought into it, I think the perfect temperature scale would be one that set zero at absolute zero, and had degree sizes such that the following temperatures were all nice round numbers:

1. Water freezes.
2. "Room Temperature." That's a discussion for another day, but there's lots of slosh allowed on this one.
3. Normal human body temperature.
4. Water boils.

It should be possible.

[Chancellor Valium]

Originally Posted by Derek

Using that logic, all liquids should freeze at zero.


Which is true of all base-10 measuring systems. And even taking you at your meaning, Fahrenheit isn't exactly like distances which have inches, feet, yards, and miles, with non-base-10 conversions between them. There's only one unit.


Why is water special? Why does it make sense that ethanol freezes at -114.3 °C instead of -173.74 °F?


It's still arbitrary. There's no scientific reason why water should be chosen as the fluid. Why not hydrogen? Or nitrogen? Or mercury? Or gold? Those are elements, not compounds, so you think they might be given priority. Scientifically, it makes sense that absolute zero would be zero.

(Apparently I'm in an argumentative mood today. Ignore me.)

Isn't the Kelvin scale a bit...big though, for everyday use?

[Nate the Great]

I've been working on a "Grant Scale." For those who read the fine print on my fivers, Grant is my "stage last name." Operating with the following goals in mind:

1. Zero Grant=Absolute Zero.
2. The freezing and boiling points of water should represent reasonable numbers divisible by ten (with a little slush allowed, after all the temperature of water alters these properties and scientists would have to look up these things on a temp/pressure chart anyway)

I've come up with the following properties in mind. It's really picking coordinates off of a y=1.366x chart where x is the melting temp and y is the boiling temp. 1.366 is the ratio of water boiling to freezing on the Kelvin scale. I'm rounding off the boiling point, as I imagine that pressure and other factors allow for a little more variability in that temp than freezing.

Kelvin: (273.15, 373.15)
Farenheit: (32, 212)
Grant 1: (140, 190)
Grant 2: (160, 220)
Grant 3: (300, 410)
Grant 4: (600, 820)

I think that Grant 1 is really nice. The normal human body temperature is about 159, or even 160 if you're generous. Room temperature (60 Farenheit) is about 148, sloshable to 150.

[Nate the Great]

Oh, just wanted to clarify that (begin deep radio commercial fine print voice) the Grant scale is total fanon, not serious at all, invented to solve a "problem," I don't take it too seriously, you shouldn't either, yada yada.

[Sa'ar Chasm]

I don't see anyone defending Farenheit. I think that normal day-to-day temperatures are better represented in it, but that's another discussion.

Says you. I can't make head or tail of your crazy Foreignheat numbers. Is 59 hot, cold or lukewarm?

[Nate the Great]

Foreignheat. You kill me. My coroner will be sending you his bill.

[JVTruman]

Originally Posted by Sa'ar Chasm

Says you. I can't make head or tail of your crazy Foreignheat numbers. Is 59 hot, cold or lukewarm?

It's somewhat cold; at least I think so. I take issue with the '60 Fahrenheit as room temperature' figure above, but I'm a native of Phoenix, Arizona, so that's probably why.

[mudshark]

For scientific purposes, "room temperature" is generally considered to be 25 C (or 77° F) if I remember rightly.

[Nate the Great]

Yikes. I guess I'm just a cold-blooded Minnesotan. 77 F is a nice summer day, but I wouldn't want to spend all of my time in it, I don't care what the humidity is.

[Chancellor Valium]

Originally Posted by Infinite Improbability

Foreignheat. You kill me. My coroner will be sending you his bill.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

[Nate the Great]

Um, okay?............

[MaverickZer0]

I prefer to set it at around 20 C (Is that like 70 F?), low humidity, but then, I'm a crazy Winnipegger anyway. And I'm fairly partial to chill.

Foreignheat...*bookmarks word* Perfect.

[Nate the Great]

Okay, I guess it's time for the old ubiquitous temp coversion formula. Can't call myself an engineer or a college graduate if I can't rattle it off of my head:

5(F-32)=9C

Yeah, I know that's not the usual format, but I prefer everything on one line if possible. 20 C is 68 F, or 150 G, in case you were wondering.

[Sa'ar Chasm]

Yeah, I know that's not the usual format, but I prefer everything on one line if possible. 20 C is 68 F, or 150 G, in case you were wondering.

You measure temperature in Gauss now?

[Nate the Great]

No, I measure temperature in degrees Grant. You weren't wondering, but

G=(C+273.15)/1.951

[Chancellor Valium]

Originally Posted by Notme

Foreignheat.

Originally Posted by Chancellor Valium

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

[Nate the Great]

To guide this conversation back towards the thread topic, which do you think we're more likely to get first?

1. A true handheld hypospray.
2. An energy beam that can stun.
3. A handheld scanner that can detect heartbeats and body temperature from (let's say) five feet away.

All of these things should be less than two hundred years away, in theory, so which do you think we'll get first? Not at the size that Star Trek has it, but at a size that can be carried around without too much trouble and run on fuel cells.

[Gatac]

200? Try 20. We're almost there on all three. That said, I think the scanner will be first.

Gatac

[Nate the Great]

I don't know about that, so I'll play along. However, I think that a major obstacle we still have to face about handheld devices is battery power. How do we keep batteries small while maintaining large power outputs for large periods of time, all with minimal recharging times?

[Chancellor Valium]

Of the three, the energy beam. A deadly version, of course.

@II: We don't. Microscopic fusion reactors, I say. Or somesuch.