Bloomin' 'eck you're not asking much are you?
My weight? Pah! That's a state secret!
My wife is re-doing her GCSE Maths, and she has to do a statistics project which will count as 10% of her final grade. She needs to get at least 30 adults' measurements as follows. No names will be given, only whether male or female.
If you would like to help, please let us know the following measurements for you, your husband/wife/partner/friend and anyone else you can think of. She needs the info by next weekend ideally.
If anyone doesn't want to post their measurements here, please PM them to me. Ta.
Right, the measurements needed are:
Height (ins)
Arm length (ins)
Hand span (ins)
Foot length, without shoe (ins)
Head circumference, just above ears (ins)
Weight (stones)
Plus, of course, your sex (Male/female).
Bloomin' 'eck you're not asking much are you?
My weight? Pah! That's a state secret!
Roight then:Originally Posted by Baruch
Height 69.75
Arm length 28.25 (to fingertips)
Hand span 9
Foot length 11
Head circ. 23.25
Weight 11st 12lbs
Male - not too many ladies with white beards.
And I'm keeping quiet about my age ;-) But those particular measurements barely vary over the years, apart from the last - just about half a stone up in my case from fighting fit to demonstrable decrepitude.
Still a few people short. Come on, anyone else want to help out by giving your (or someone else's) measurements? No names will be given in the project.
Off-topic a bit I am afraid
Why NOT metric in GCSE maths? Even when I was taught maffs in primary school (1967-ish) everything was metric. Weights, lengths, numbers.
Worrying.
Clive
Don't suppose it actually makes any difference to statistics so maybe the statistics teacher never bothered to get with the times (or is an underground champion of the imperial measure).Originally Posted by Clive Long
Maybe you've discovered the very loophole that allows imperial to persist!
There is something comfortable about imperial measures of length though isn't there? For some reason I think they're easier to visualise. (Except I like kilometers for a while until distances get into the 10's of miles range).
Also, train of though started now... is it a bit brain-washy and blinkered to only teach using the currently adopted weights and measures system of Europe (et al)? There is some value in being educated in alternative units, in fact in some respects I wish I knew a lot more about chains, furlongs and such, I don't readily visualise these lengths, always have to look them up and sometimes it would be useful if I could (instantly visualise). If someone could go back through every historical record I'm ever likely to look at and update the measurements to metric that would also solve my problem.
The benefit of (UK) imperial is all the lovely prime factors in the units:
14lbs to a stone (7x2)
22 yards to a chain ? (2x11)
8 feet to a fathom ? (2x2x2)
16 oz to the pound (2x2x2x2)
12 inches to the foot (3 x4)
etc. etc.
The point being it makes the division of practical things: salt, flour, cloth etc easy by having equal measures on weighing scales or folding cloth
Sorry, sorry for going off-topic. Doing my measurements now - PM only
Clive
Edit: The disadvantage (I think) of using imperial for a stats exercise is the maffs is 'ard unless you are used to manipulating the quantities
e.g. what's the average / mean, mode and standard deviation of: 10 stone 4 lb, 13 stone 2 lb, 8 stone 13lb etc. etc. ?
No doubt ESG or David Franklin will show me to be wrong
Last edited by Clive Long; 21st-September-2005 at 12:04 AM.
I think it'd be cool, but confusing to teach us all the imperial measures to the same degree as they teach metric. Though, at least in my school, they were realistic and told you how to convert things like feet and inches, and pounds and ounces into metric equivalents.Originally Posted by JoC
That said, I really don't think there are many people alive who actually know and "have a measure of" all these less common imperial whatsits, like chains and hundred weights, and such. And so even if you did know, you wouldn't be able to drop them into casual conversation... "Yeah, if you go up the street a few furlong and a dozen chains, take a left..." (I can understand why it'd be useful to you, of course.)
(Hmm, reading back this is pretty much a content-free reply. And I measured that in cubic doo-dahs. )
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
I think it's something to do with imperial to metric conversion, which they're going to do as part of the project. Or something.Originally Posted by Clive Long
Height (ins) 66.567
Arm length (ins) 35.4
Hand span (ins) 8.2
Foot length, without shoe (ins) 11.87
Head circumference, just above ears (ins) 23.4
Weight (stones) 12.34
Plus, of course, your sex (Male/female) Male
Originally Posted by Baruch
If you are going to the dance in Cardiff on Friday, bring a tape measure! I can give you my weight and Sunrays can do the rest - hope that helps!
Elaine
Cheers. We'll see you there.Originally Posted by ElaineB
Tell you what, we could turn this into a bit of a party game!!!!Originally Posted by Baruch
Elaine
What - "Guess the weight of the lady"? I can't think of a more certain way of getting a slapOriginally Posted by ElaineB
Or two, or three, or more ......Originally Posted by Baruch
Height (ins) 65.5
Arm length (ins) 25
Hand span (ins) 7
Foot length, without shoe (ins) 9
Head circumference, just above ears (ins) 21.5
Weight (stones) 9 stone(ish - don't weigh myself regularly but its usually around about there!)
Plus, of course, your sex : female
Just in the interests of science, the data I provided was completely made-up... Never trust 2nd hand data!
Sean
Thought there was a touch of the simian in those long hairy arms. But didn't wish to draw public conclusions.Originally Posted by tsh
femaleOriginally Posted by Baruch
Er... yeah... then why post it?Originally Posted by tsh
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks