Scale Of Measurement

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1977.tb00597.x

https://academic.oup.com/hcr/article-abstract/4/1/58/4626783?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Is salary considered a ratio scale of measurement? Can we talk about a zero point when it comes to this? Seems kinda off to me, if the salary is zero, can we even talk about it being a salary?

I'm designing a research survey. I've drafted the survey and I am creating an accompanying codebook. Part of the codebook is the measurement scale, which basically defines what kind of random variable the survey question elicits. I.e multiple choice questions with no order are nominal, Likert scale questions are ordinal, range questions are interval, etc.

Most of these are pretty simple to determine, but I'm having a brain-ache thinking about open ended questions, e.g fill in the blank. Are they nominal because they are solely named, no numeric value can be assigned, arithmetic cannot be performed, and order does not apply/matter? Or are they a special class where measurement scale is not applicable?

I have been astounded at how hard it's been to find a no nonsense, no frills scale (digital or analog) with rock solid accuracy/repeatability. Everything I've purchased or read about at the < $100 price level has been really bad. I would think that this space would have been solved in the 70s. Meanwhile anything today with high ratings on Amazon also has plenty of 1 stars bemoaning 4-5 lbs. (or more!) variations across consecutive measurements. And I've experienced that.

I don't want BMI, I don't want a digital weather vane, I just want something that is insanely accurate and is built for that. Kinda willing to throw money at this problem.

(I thought going analog would solve all the issues. (I mean how hard is this tech to build?) And even those failed in this regard.)

Thanks!

I want to easily make them the same feet... but blender is telling me that they are both 1.000 .... that's not what I need. Is there a setting I have to change to get real world dimensions and for it to actually work?

The top and bottom are the same according to this.

https://imgur.com/CSXZGGs

Also, the icons to the left got microscopic in size... how to I make those icons bigger again.

I’ve had this hypothesis for a while and I recently put it to the test with a little weight set. Here is what I found- https://imgur.com/gallery/OJjplOz

The little 12mg piece of metal wouldn’t register unless there was something to weigh down the plate, this is an example of the phenomena which seems to occur with most cheap scales.

I usually use a nickel (5.000g) or other coin to weigh the plate down down before placing what I want to weigh then just do the math (subtract 5g in the case of a nickel). In addition, the coin will simultaneously tell you if your scale is accurate or not in that current position/calibration/etc.

Stay safe!

For example, all length would be measured by the planck length multiplied to powers of ten, and all time would be measured by planck seconds multiplied to powers of ten.

Also, what would the speed of light be in this system?

From what i understand, the universe (3d)flat in shape. Is it possible that it's really a 3d flat surface on a 3+1d or 4d 'round' structure similar to a sphere having a 2d flat surface around a 3d structure? Going along with this, is it possible that the measurements that tell us it's flat are effected in a similar way to us not needing to account for earth's curvature when building houses? Like, the size is just so much bigger than we can currently observe that it appears to be flat but is positive or negative curvature? Could gravitational waves on a large enough scale contribute to this?

Edited for clarification:

Most kitchen scales have an accuracy of .1g and a display of only whole numbers. The more precise you want a kitchen scale to be, the more expensive it is. Most inexpensive gunpowder scales have an accuracy of .001g and display units in .01g. It’s much better for those of us ents who enjoy microdosing, to check and see if you bought a full 8th instead of 2.8g, and it is especially helpful for edibles if you know the approximate THC content. I know that all of these can be done with accuracy with a higher quantity of herb, and dividing later, but for some of us that may not be an option

My scale is all wonky. Some days it gives me a lower weight, other days it gives me a higher weight (with variations as much as 10 pounds lighter or heavier).

My only true reference of progress are my clothes and body measurements. I went from a size 24/3x to a numerical size between 18 and a 16 and a size XL since May 19th (clothes brand Torrid). My waist went from a 46” to 40”. That’s the only reference I truly have. The scale is no longer reliable.

I also track steps (about 5k a day) and calories (between 1200-1400 a day).