But yeah, no, chocolate bars are usually 50-60g. Which is also a thing, because they used to be 72g. I remember that number specifically because that's two of your "ounces", except on a second Tuesday during the ides of march when an ounce is like 85 grams. But only for red things. There's a whole separate system for blue things.
True that, especially as they shrinkflate it. A chocolate bar is usually 50-60g these days. Used to be 71g as I was a kid. Gee I wonder where that number came from...
I've heard that one of the reasons that metrification didn't take off in the States was that when they converted highway signs, they rounded down instead of up, so people got mad at "losing" a couple km/h. Tactical error, there.
yeah, a duodecimal metric system would have been better. Still, it's more important to have a standard system than it is for it to be ideal. It's the strongest argument for US customary system within the USA, as well - but that argument breaks down when you widen the scope to the world.
In the 18th century context, and its dozens of competing measurement systems, something like the metric system was sorely needed just for standardization. We're just lucky that it was something more or less sensible. Had the US customary system won out, I think we'd be objectively worse off.
So it could have been better, but it could also have been MUCH much much worse.
0.625 implies your measurement is precise to the nearest thousandth
It does. If it were precise to less than that, you'd say 0.62 or 0.6 to indicate hundredths or tenths. Why would you say 0.625 if you're not precise to thousandths? You'd say 0.62500 if you wanted to indicate precision to hundred-thousandths.
"The fraction allows you to communicate length and tolerance in a single number"
I don't see how that isn't true of decimals, too. 0.1 indicates a precision of 1 digit, 0.12 indicates a precision of 2, 0.120 indicates a precision of three.
This hurts my brain. Why do we care about all the weird fractions? +/- 0.1 is just another way of saying 1/10. You can still do that if you want without having to do fraction math in random denominators.
If you have a pasta roller, it's a snap! 400g flour, 4 eggs, little oil, little salt. Form into a dough, it takes a while to come together. It's a difficult dough to work. A mixer can help. 8 minutes or so of kneading. Rest the dough an hour, roll out into sheets, and then either use the noodle attachment or cut it into noodles by hand. It honestly only takes like 15 minutes of actual hands on effort and 90 minutes of total time.
Kinda with the commenter. A well stocked pantry just means you can make pretty much anything. If you specified the pantry contents, perhaps it would be more of a challenge.
I could make a sponge cake, or sushi, or curry, or ice cream, with these ingredients and my pantry. :)
Stir-fry, probably. Onions, mushrooms, the pepper, some spices, some sesame oil. Fry it up. Toss in the barley and some soup stock. Simmer a bit to hydrate. Then see how it tastes and adjust. Maybe finish with a few eggs and scramble.
As far as I am aware, nothing has ever released this much sustained co2 over such a short period. Even outliers like the Deccan traps did it far more slowly.
Somewhat famously, beavers are rampant in ... southern Argentina I think, and they are incredibly invasive in a biome that is not able to take advantage of them.
Sometimes!
But yeah, no, chocolate bars are usually 50-60g. Which is also a thing, because they used to be 72g. I remember that number specifically because that's two of your "ounces", except on a second Tuesday during the ides of march when an ounce is like 85 grams. But only for red things. There's a whole separate system for blue things.