Why Fahrenheit Is Better Than Celsius

In 1724 physicist Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit designed a system for measuring temperature. His system was a variation of Ole Rwømer’s, who after breaking his legs trying to measure the speed of light, designed the first calibrated temperature scale. He chose the freezing temperature of salt as zero, and the boiling temperature of pure water as 60.

Fahrenheit took Rømer’s scale and stretched it by a factor of four to make it more granular and shifted it to make it easier to mark mercury thermometers. The Fahrenheit scale is now defined by two points: water freezing at 32°F and water boiling at 212°F.

The Celsius scale, invented in 1742, uses the same criteria as Fahrenheit, but with zero and one hundred as the reference numbers. It sure seems like Celsius is more elegant and even more logical. So it’s no surprise it appeals to the scientists in charge of being scientific.

But for the rest of us walking planet earth, Fahrenheit rules!

For example, consider those who live in Vancouver, Canada. There, the temperature is always between 0°F and 100°F, with an average of 51°F:

As long as I can remember that any temperature below 32°F is good for skiing, I have an easy 100 point scale to think about temperature.

By comparison, temperatures in Celsius seem to lack rhyme or reason, fluctuating from -19°C to +34°C.

While the extreme climate of Toronto occasionally sees temperatures above 100°F and below 0°F, the average is a handy 49°F.

If you like histograms:

Hopefully you can see the usefulness of the Fahrenheit system.

Water is plentiful and the most important molecule for life. However, there’s nothing special about it; there are thousands of other molecules we could use to measure temperature: carbon dioxide, methane and so on… each have a freezing point and a boiling point.

Humans should use a system that works for us, so we can know whether to wear flip flops or shoes, shorts or pants; or a sweater or a coat.

Thanks for reading. Please share!