What is the Most Universal Unit of Measurement?

I don't know what they use in the rest of the universe, but on earth, I think the standard tends to be metric...as it should be.

I have no ready excuses for those that refuse, but it sure would declutter my toolbox.

What time is it?

Don't say daytime.

Agreed. The units for time are the most universal unit. Most vertebrates respond to daily cycles. You cannot get more universal on this planet than spanning across many species. So I would say that the most universal unit is a day.

I don't think most vertebrates have a sense of days as units.

.

Most vertebrates are probably unlikely to grasp usefully the concept of '14 days'.

.

Even with the dedication of the most talented instructors a lungfish is unlikely to demonstrate proficiency or even recognition of the unit of time we know as a day.

.

.

Units involve standardization of measure typically enforced by custom and/or decree.

.

.

If we are going to include the opinions of non-human life then perhaps the very universal unit used for describing the measurement of 'other' would be a good candidate.

.

The 'Friend, Fight/Flee, Food, or Fornication-candidate' (there is a shorter final F category, I'm just not sure if it will remain posted) units of measuring 'others' is probably quite universal, perhaps even beyond vertebrates.

Universal implies the same everywhere. Time is not if you want to nit pick.

Time runs at different rates depending on where you are geographically and where you are relative to the Earth. GPS satellites are an obvious example where onboard clocks run at different rates compared to their Earth born counterparts.

We must define "universal" to qualify your answer. Will a Vulcan think of time as we do? (if Vulcans indeed exist) No. We base our measure of time on the daily revolutions of the Earth and the time it takes to orbit the Sun. (loosely - we've had to modify these a bit)

However, if we talk about only Earth, then perhaps you've found the answer.

Are we perhaps going a bit far at this time to decide what is "universal" as we have yet to meet the other occupants of this universe? (alien theories about ancient gods aside)

Numbers.

Number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's a good candidate measurement, but which units are you championing?

Arabic numerals seem to be the unit of numbers popular with humans.

c.h.

What color?

Red of course. One r.c.h. is the thinnest width perceptible without the use of special tools.

Time is good ....
but is is matter of precision or emotions ... seconds, sun rises or sleeps to Christmas.

Metrics generally ....
Metric Australia sells heaps of iron ore each year in millions of tons, not tonnes.
(It is still a bit of a mix ... and gold in ounces, troy ounces ... take your pick).

And numbers ....
The Romans did not have zero
The Chinese mix 'numbers' with symbols ... 2 is =, and ten is +, so 12 is +=.
Tuesday is day two ... but have many ways of writing this
so while 'time' expressed in days could be the most universal unit of measurement,
it can be said many ways. Below is just one Chinese form.

About like that?

Yup, that's fine...
Del

(or...
In metric...
comme ci? comme ca? )

I forgot to mention which actual unit I thought was most universal for the go/no-go type of measurement.

It either has to be:

-Nod and smile/shake head and frown (if we are only considering organic lifeforms when calculating most universal).

-Binary (if we are considering shear amount of information processed today in those units by any active system).

Taking your lead, no matter what the language ... OK is getter close to the most 'universal unit of measurement' . Yes, some do make it a question and add various thumb gestures (up and down) and head shaking in all directions to add a degree of confusion but so is life!

Have you ever noticed that dogs and cats have several similar signals that very different things?

.

This might be one reason for the general animosity.

.

Dogs wag tails when happy. Cats wag tails when annoyed.

.

Dogs look at you when comfortable and away when feeling threatened intimidated. Cats look at your when feeling threatened intimidated and away from you when comfortable.

.

Dogs will sometimes twist (and wiggle) sideways and put their head down when they want to play. Cats will turn sideways and put their backs up and heads down when they think they are going to fight.

.

Most dogs will be uncomfortable defecating inside the house and would only do this if they couldn't get outside. Many peoples cats seem to take perverse pleasure in crapping inside especially when there are people introduce to the odor.

.

.

There are of course exceptions. For example, I would bet that Del is probably far more discrete about his indoor defecating, and I understand that many cats are trained to use the toilet and even flush.

The Planck.

It has recently replaced the cubit.

The parsec. Even in distant galaxies, a long time ago and far, far away, pilots used the parsec to describe their paths through space time. -- Can't get any more universal than the universe itself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzL-LpmLSKs

But the parsec is based on the Astronomical Unit, which implies the Earth is special in the universe and all other forms of life agree to that.

Brightens my day. :)

Some 2007 feedback on the PARSEC & PLANCK

The Parsec ....

StupendousMan
Originally Posted by ozark1 The somewhat circular logic answer is that astronomical papers use SI units. The parsec is the SI unit for astronomical distance (IAU 1976) so must be used.

"It's one of those obscure IAU decisions (planets anyone?). The most likely reasons were (a) longer history than the light year and (b) the math is easier Actually, the term "light year" has been around longer than the term "parsec". The earliest record I can find of "light year" is an article on the measurement of parallaxes of nearby stars, written by Dr. A. Auwers, originally in Astronomische Nachriten, then republished in "Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society", vol 24, page 71, 1864. See for yourself:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//...00071.000.html

On the other hand, the earliest reference to the term "parsec" which I have been able to find dates to 1913. "


And on the PLANCK front ... here are some comments ... it can be both time and length!

Planck time is the claimed shortest time ever. It is the duration needed by light to travel one Planck length. And according to the experts, a Planck Length is the shortest possible length, so moving particles 'jump' a minimum of one planck length at a time.

I will let others ponder the Parsec / Planck claims to be "the most universal unit of measurement" ... any other suggestions?

You wrote, "And on the PLANCK front ... here are some comments ... it can be both time and length!"

And that is the beauty of the Planck. It measures both length, etc., and the passage of time. Universal, no?

The only downside is a Planck is a little like the Japanese Yen. You need enormous amounts of them to do anything useful.

"... in common worldwide use?"

Hard to beat binary, but I'll suggest the telomere.

It is a tough day when you don't learn something.This little discussion has exposed me (again in some situations) to plancks, parsecs and now telomere (lengths). "Telomere length is associated with the general health of an individual as well as certain diseases, beyond cancer".

Taking even telomere lengths (measured as being alive or dead in the broadest sense),
it would seem that BINARY in its many forms could be the most universal unit of measurement. OK/NOT OK?!

Now, I'll just run that through my quantum computer where binary is ditched and replaced with 5 states for greater efficiency and substantially higher speeds.

That's a good one!

Postscript for those supporters of TIME as the most universal unit of measurement, here is a link to OPTICAL CLOCKS which are seen as being the most accurate of timing devices to date.

I've always wondered how they check them???

Atom. Hydrogen.

10. The number of fingers and the number of toes. Doesn't every parent start to count baby's digits out loud at an early age (rhetorical question - NNTR)?

If you believe our news agencies the most common units of measurement are double decker buses & football pitches.

The inch! Geometridae with 35,000 species worldwide use it everyday in their attempt to measure the world. Thus the name inchworm. They greatly out number humans.

bit?

It's all ones and zeros to me said the CPU!

Although time is something that is measured, it is not a unit of measurement. The units of measurement for time that are the most universal are: days, hours, minutes and seconds. Although these units may have different names depending upon language, their size remains the same.

I did not include years and months as they can vary due to varying calendars.

My answer would have been EACH, which is used for enumerating (counting objects), but the OP eliminated this one right from the beginning.

"I did not include years and months as they can vary due to varying calendars."

As can, days, hours, minutes and seconds, depending on the planet.

Look, we are talking universal, right?

Sorry Lyn, I disagree. Planets other than earth are excluded. The OP, in his original question, limited the scope to being worldwide, which implies planet earth.

"what is the most universal unit of measurement in common worldwide use?"

Other planets would be other worlds and we do not know of the existence any inhabitants on these other worlds or the units that they might be using. I would imaging that if earthlings were to ever inhabit another planet, that the unit of measure for time used on that planet would have a different name, or at least a modifier that would distinguish it from earths units.

OK. That makes it global, and not universal.

Ha Ha!

Ah, engineers arguing semantics!

I read that as a universal unit of measurement that is used worldwide.

So, that could be a worldwide measurement standard or is it a standard that is the same for the whole universe?

Seems ambiguous to me. :)

Well,

Given the context, I'll concede.

However, you seem to be caught in your own trap: #21

My point was the parsec is an Earth-based unit and therefor not really "universal". At least not in the construct of the universe.

Then again, maybe the honey-do list is really the most universal unit of measurement?

I am going to play the temporal Nazi here. Time can not be measured.

I dare you. Go ahead and try.

However, we can measure the passage of time, and that is what you do when you use some form of a clock. You are not actually measuring time.

Ok Anonymous Hero. In the spirit of technical correctness, I would like to amend my answer an resubmit it.

The units of measurement for time the passage of time that are the most universal are: days, hours, minutes and seconds. Although these units may have different names depending upon language, their size remains the same.

I did not include years and months as they can vary due to varying calendars.

Amendment accepted. :)

Ok Snave. Now that we've sorted out the nitty pickies, I'm going to challenge and say that the day (or night) alone is the most universal unit of measurement for the passage of time in common worldwide use, because unlike hours, minutes and seconds, for which a clock is needed, the "day" can be recognized with no special tools, and by other organisms, including birds, animals, plants, and people who don't own a watch.

Except that is a problem for those, for example, above the Arctic Circle.

Why? You're imposing an engineer's desire that the unit be consistent. The unit does not have to be consistent. It just has to still exist and be used as a unit of measurement North of the Arctic circle. (And South of the Antarctic circle for you nit pickers. You know who you are.) That is out of the scope of the question.

Ah, so you are saying Arctic and Antarctic circles are off limits and we should just not go there?

That's very limited thinking, but since I hate the cold I am going to whole heartedly agree with you! :)

Ok artsmith. I have to agree that a day is the most universally used interval of time.

But other than humans, do any organisms use the unit of measurement, day? I don't think so.

I think many aquatic and surface dwelling organisms (those with lifetimes > 1 day) follow internal and external cues to regulate their cycles to a circadian rhythm.

other than humans, do any organisms use the unit of measurement, day?

hmmmm. that is more or less asking whether animals count the days or not. It would be difficult to provide a concrete proof of that.

I do think the usual assumption, that animals are marginally aware of the world they live in, is biblical in origin rather than scientific (no offence intended). Even without objective proof, it is only reasonable to me that any animal that lives more than a year would be equipped to recognize seasonal cycles - a necessity in fact for many animals that store food for winter, hibernate, migrate, or whatever they do.

On the shorter scale, you might ask, does a bird know how many days it takes for the egg to hatch? How many days before the chicks are fledged? Do they count the days, I wonder. I know that in summer, the little birds kick up an enormous racket around 4 in the morning - the hour before dawn. Not at 10 pm, midnight, or random hours... the same hour every day. I guess the question is, how important is it for them to count the days or even the hour of the day? If it's an important survival aid, then they probably do.

Maybe not above the arctic circle, though.

Dismissing if other creatures count days or just respond to the change of a day is a red herring. That is unless you have a unit measurement that other creatures demonstrably do count that's more universal.

Well, on a casual google, apparently there's some scientific evidence that animals do count. Whether they count days.....?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-animals-have-the-ability-to-count "Under certain conditions, monkeys could sometimes outperform college students."

'....the "day" can be recognized with no special tools, and by other organisms, including birds, animals, plants, and people who don't own a watch....'

.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" - M. Truzzi.

.

Where is your evidence that the concept of the unit of 'days' is recognized in plants and animals other than people?

_{As a reminder, 'birds', as well as people (even who don't own watches), are subsets of 'animals'.}

.

Even though it is clear that these organisms can sense (or exhibit changes coinciding with) some of the same periodic phenomena that we use as clues of the passage of a day, that is insufficient to conclude that these organisms have any concept of standardizing the passage of time based on the periodicity that we perceive.

My comments were clearly speculative. However, excluding plants from the discussion of 'concepts', you might consider the following reasoning.

1. Animals (including birds) can sense the passage of a day: sun rising and setting.

2. Numeracy in animals is more common than previously supposed, according to the article linked above and other reports of research in this field. The level of numeracy found in some primitive human societies (one, two, three, many) may be quite common in animals, according to researchers assessing the present knowledge.

3. Given the capacity to count eg numbers of food/prey items as reported in scientific studies, the unanswered question is whether such numeracy is likely to be applied to the passage of time. Proof is not available, but yes/no probability can be reasoned.

The survival advantage of marking the passage of time by clearly recognizable units such as 'days' must be considered. If there is no benefit to this application of numeracy, then it is improbable that it should be applied in such a manner. If there is a significant benefit to the application, then it is probable that it should be applied in such a manner. Hypothesis may thereby be derived.

Some uses of counting days:

- for animals that migrate or travel over a 'range' (often quite large), journeys or distances may be measured in days

- the time for fruit to ripen can be reckoned in days (1.2.3 or many days to ripe), very significant for investment of food gathering resources over a natural landscape where such resources are typically scattered (and may be 'days' away too). The ability to judge "how many days" before we come back to this place to eat these berries, is important to survival, as is "how many days" to get to that food source.

- gestation and care of young take a specific amount of time, and require a specific investment of resources, whose availability is time-sensitive.

In my opinion, this is sufficient evidence that animals stand to benefit significantly by using their numeracy ability to mark the passage of 'days', and that failure to do so would be a survival risk. Therefore I think it probable that animals which are capable of doing so, evaluate the passage of time using 'days' as units.

If you find this extraordinary, please explain.

Maybe animals count. But I have my doubts. I believe it more probable that animals instinctively know the following:

• winter days have less daylight than summer days
  
• winter is colder than summer
• night temperatures start to warm an hour before sunrise
  

I would expect animals to have seasonal knowledge, but don't know why you would call that knowledge "instinctive". These are direct perceptions plus memory - long term memory if you like. Vertebrates can have pretty good memory capabilities (hint: what do squirrels and cab drivers have in common?)

As for your doubts about animals counting, do you have some grounds for dismissing the research that says they do? Or is that doubt just a habit of thought.

I didn't know night temperatures start to warm an hour before sunrise. I doubt it.. and according to the graph here it is not the case. (Source: COMET) Minimum temperature is at dawn.

'....We are animals. We can count. What misguided anthropomorphic claptrap makes you think that none of the other animals that evolved simultaneously with us can count and measure....'

.

"Breaker-breaker 19, you got your ears on, The Kettle Black?"

....

"...Come in, The Kettle Black..... The Pot, over."

.

.

Somewhere one fish is scolding another,

"....We are animals. We can breath oxygen from the water. What misguided pescepomorphic claptrap makes you think that none of the other animals that evolved simultaneously with us can breathe oxygen from the water?....."

artsmith & redfred - I plead no contest and would like to withdraw my comment #76.

This is a much stronger argument (and a little more narrow).

.

I think if allowances for general (none, one, two, many or none, less, some, more) rather than just specific (integer) numeracy are made, the possibilities are vastly expanded. Most of the ambiguity in experiments concerning whether or not distinctions are being made concerning amount or number as well as whether or not the skills are typically utilized in the wild, or something that develops from training (much like sea lions that play frizbee) disappears if the bar is lowered to a general type of numeracy.

.

As an aside, are specific numeracy and general numeracy (perhaps there is a better standard term?) 'units' of quantity? If so, it seems a very basic general numeracy could be a candidate for the most universal unit.

.

Back to the subject, although I find portions of your argument compelling, I'm not sure that it is sufficient to indicate that most of even many animals are capable of evaluating time using 'days' as a unit.

.

Evaluating time in 'days' (or any other unit), especially in the context of the planning you suggest, seems to require something like a hypercognitive ability like consciousness. While there are a few animals that give strong indication of conceptualizing self and behaving consciously, they are exceedingly rare.

.

It is probably reasonable to infer that those rare animals, are probably more likely than not to be capable of evaluating the passage of time using 'days' as units.

.

Other than with those striking exceptions, the evidence is lacking. The mere regular reaction to periodic stimulus is insufficient to conclude cognition and evaluation of units of time.

.

A solar panel array can be built to track the sun, yet it would be difficult to argue that seeing its operation indicates a high probability that the solar panel has been given the ability to evaluate time in units of days.

.

Circadian rhythms are pervasive in the wide array of species on earth. These internal clocks apparently continue to function without corresponding signal input (dawn daylight dusk darkness). These internal clocks also function well in newborns, infants and toddlers, even before they have a well developed the concept of 'time' or 'day'.

.

A complex evolved reaction to stimulus might appear the result of cognitive evaluations like 'judging time' and 'estimating storage needs', but these are in many instances more likely to be anthropomorphic artifacts.

.

You yourself exhibit reactions to environmental changes that might suggest to a (hypothetical advanced inquisitive) species keenly focused on those phenomena, that you were consciously evaluating the units to make the changes. Never the less, you were probably not evaluating units of brightness as your iris adjusts to changing light conditions, nor to the units of CO2 concentration as your breathing rate adjusts.

You might also want to read the sections on "Interval Timing" and "Numeracy" in the wiki on animal cognition.

The experiments on interval timing involved learned intervals, not days, so not applicable to the universal unit discussion. However, the ability of animals to measure time is established.

The dollar.

I like where you're going with this, but why not the Joule? BTUs, KWH, calories -these are all different ways of expressing energy/time. But then again hardly anyone uses the Joule or even knows what it is, so it clearly is not in 'common worldwide use'. I think quite a few folks don't have or don't pay for electricity so they don't think much about kwh. So I'd say money is the most common unit of measurement. Of course as we all know:

• t = $ (time = money)

and of course

• $ = mc^2 (~$0.10/kwh where I live)

So it all comes back to time and energy. Enough time and energy to collect enough more matter so we can harvest enough energy from it to make it through the next chunk of time. Therefore:

• time = lunch

Navigation

We would have a bit of a mess if not following the rules of navigation.

Two minutes south of a good answer

I am assuming that by excluding numbers you want to exclude the ratio of circumference to diameter, which should be "universal".

Facial expressions.

Regardless of where we are from, language, or anything else, each of us can accurately measure what another person is experiencing, by the look on their face.

This may be becoming more the case, but there are significant cultural differences in many important facial expressions.

.

A good example is the vast difference between what a smile typically conveys in the United States as opposed to what a smile typically conveys in many countries in southeast Asia, Vietnam for example.

Having been 'educated' to take more care in my use of English expression, the original question was "What is" vs "What was" and "What could be" ... so maybe the "most universal" (worldwide less above the arctic cycle on a good day if required, so maybe it should have been "common"), could demonstrate that the 'most common unit of measurement' has changed with time.

The suggestion of kilowatt hour or 'unit' was prompted by its perceived use in "imperial" USA. (KWHr has elements of money, energy availability & consumption, time and even binary ON/OFF in one measurement basis).

Well, I suppose some psychologist (that I shall not name) would have you say sex is the fundamental unit of universal measurement. Probably would include the poles, too.

Are you referring to gender or copulation?

You can use your imagination. :)

Must be copulation then!

Yes,No, or Maybe

Because a little Superposition is needed for good measure.

I think we have a winner ... time as expressed in days ....
and interesting to note the discussion on a range of options! Thankyou all.

Cant ask NIST:

NIST Closed, NIST and Affiliated Web Sites Not Available

Our government are all too busy being ass hats........

Due to a lapse in government funding, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is closed and most NIST and affiliated web sites are unavailable until further notice. We sincerely regret the inconvenience.

Yes, the admnistration closed a lot of things not becuase they had to, they closed them for maximum political effect. For instance, open air monuments in Washington D.C. like when they locked out WWII vets wanting to visit the WWII memorial from places far off.

Nice going butt heads.

The Spitehouse at work.

With all the increase in the various forms of computerized information traffic, it would seem more likely to be the ''byte'', or multiples thereof...

In such transmission and storage, the length of such communications would have to be parsed in to packets of certain sizes, sent, and then reconnected, in the correct order, to remain usable. Such (strings of e-data) are, in effect, (measured) out into appropriate lengths, and sent on their (merry ?) ways, (zillions) of times a second, world wide.

That seems pretty ''frequent'', and therefore, relatively ''universal'', to me...?

Typical that I finally get around to posting in a thread long after it has ceased participation. I'm 15 Daily Digest emails behind. But I doggedly intend to view the emails chronologically. So my Johnny come lately posts may happen for some time. Maybe I'll never catch up.

The word that has caused quite a diversion in answers to the OP's question is the word "universal." In looking up the word online, the Collins Dictionary, for instance, offers no less than 13 meanings for the word, depending on the context of usage. And many of them apply to different answers given in the discussion.

UNIT, as posed in the question, is suggested as an overtly used group of words for UNIT(s), describing a system, such as metric vs. imperial. Since measurement of what isn't specifically stated, answers indulged in the variety of uses of "universal" as given in its definition. And, thus, within each context there were answers for each one. The discussion quickly has become about universal, universal, if that makes sense. An overriding usage of something measured without being limited to what, or with what instrument. (O.K., I'd have to default to consciousness again, as the with what. And that impacts the suggestions, as noted in the mention of animals.)

I think I'll stick to the suggested choices of metric and imperial and go with metric, as a system of units, in use in science and engineering. (Even then, this Wikipedia article about the "debate," of metric vs. imperial, was closed because: This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.)

A pretty comprehensive article about worldwide usage is this one. But it doesn't list China. China has some units of its own, more ancient than metric, as in this short article, like Li, Chi, and Mu, for areas. Given the populations of India and China, their usage patterns, combined, account for ~36.5% of the world's population. From the chart in the first article, metric would have to be the winner, I think. (Also from this map.)

From a practical view, the units that people probably deal with the most, on a day-to-day basis, are currency units. Money is probably the most common concern in people's daily lives. The dollar is certainly the world standard of measurement, but how many people think in dollars in their head each day is another question. It is only a standard because it originates in a country whose economy has become interdependent with almost all other economies around the globe and whose markets are so prolific.

The unit that is most used on a day-to-day basis is a day. In an attempt to proffer a more universal unit to this discussion you use the unit of a day twice and imply that other units are also used with this unit.

I rest my case.

Or the dollar.

I think Redfred is correct. On a day-to-day basis, there isn't much that can complete with the day.

.

Of course, on a dollar-to-dollar basis, the dollar would be the strongest contender.

.

Things are not as clear cut once you start to consider things like:

.

-a time-is-money-with-strippers-covered-in-honey basis, or

.

- a bottom-of-the-ninth-two-outs-three-balls-two-strikes-with-loaded basis....

.

It really becomes difficult to predict a winner.... it could be anybody's game.

But more than twice during the post I was thinking about bills, money and the lack thereof. Thinking is using, no? Paying bills is definitely tied to dates due, so maybe they are neck and neck. (What unit is that??)

Case rested accepted... but do you rest it every day? And when? In the evening?