[USMA:24037] Re: tonne = megagram (An Off Shoot)

[Gustaf Sj�berg]

Subject: [USMA:23976] Re: tonne = megagram (An Off Shoot) Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 17:32:33 +0000 From: "Brij Bhushan Vij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friends:   While this 'totally' unofficial but a point to ponder!   "If a NEW name is designated to Kilogram, like what was done to change  'cgs' to MKS units' while representing distances between commercial and  higher order transactions - the disatnce between TOWNS; I feel the confusion  could be reduced".   The milli-U (U=New Unit) could then mean the present *gramme (g)*. Brij B. Vij<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >| I agree that megagram, and its SI symbol Mg, is preferable to tonne. I Totally agree!!! The kilogram is just not right in the sense that it is a base unit that by name is based on another unit. This unit, the gram, is too small to be a base unit itself. Therefore,the kilogram should be renamed and then the metric system would, except for the measuring of time, finally be consistent. Another advantage would be the option to use more comfortable centi-*****s instead of the tiny uncomfortable grams that explode into hundreds almost for every pre-packed consumer product. There would be: 1 X (= 1 kg) = 100 cX 1 L = 100 cL 1 m = 100 cm and that would be so nice and neat. To call a ton (or tonne) "megagram" seems just unnecesarry and silly.