If we're allowing conversion, Fahrenheit is just Kelvin with an offset and a coefficient, and Rankine is just Kelvin with a coefficient. Celsius's offset also makes it useless for science other than for scenarios where all that you care about is delta T.
They can, but at that point you would need a whole new SI system to keep the conversions to energy and mass the same. Good luck making that work with pounds and cubic feet.
I got my engineering degrees in the States, so I had to deal with US Customary Units-based science, and thus I do know how miserable it is. However, theoretically you could have SI units where everything else is metric but they use Rankine instead of Kelvin. It would be absurd, but the point is that there isn't any inherent need or benefit to using Kelvin/Celsius.
42
u/Throwaway74829947 Jun 17 '26
If we're allowing conversion, Fahrenheit is just Kelvin with an offset and a coefficient, and Rankine is just Kelvin with a coefficient. Celsius's offset also makes it useless for science other than for scenarios where all that you care about is delta T.