I wouldn't vote for any of them, as they all start with capital letters, thus violating the convention with respect to units named after people.
And, of course, Howard has got the existing (obsolete) unit names wrong, too. It really hertz, but only when I laugh. :) Bill -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Brenner Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 05:45 To: Howard Hayden; 'Stan Jakuba' Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mg Well, then, Howard, I vote for the Brenner. >>> "Howard Hayden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 06/23/08 6:57 PM >>> Hi Stan, Gee, I thought a short ton was 2 million millipounds. This is the problem you face when the UNIT of mass has a prefix meaning a thousand, namely the kilogram. So, a metric ton becomes a million millikilograms, for that is exactly the meaning of megagram. If the SI committee wants to do something truly useful, it would be to RENAME the kilogram so that it has no prefix. Call it the Jakuba, the Washington, the Brenner, the FMU (French Mass unit), the SIMU (SI Mass Unit), the Dalton, the Mach, the Einstein, the Cagey, or SOMETHING!!! This simple naming problem has been in the works for a half-century. Get on with it! All you've got to do is choose a name. Why should that take decades? Look at it this way. You're trying to get the whole world to quit using the word tonne. It should be much easier to get the standards committees to quit using the long-outdated term kilogram, and instead to use a non-prefixed name. That would remove an obnoxious exception to SI. Now that the shoe is on that foot, just who is it that's suffering from hardening of the categories? SI got rid of a large number of past units, among them gram-force, kilogram-force, Gauss, Gilbert, Oersted, slugs, poundals, and probably others, and for good reason. Why not do the right thing and get rid of the term kilogram? The Megagram is NOT unambiguous. Students are forever getting confused about this issue. (Try teaching a bunch of students that a megagram is a million thousandths of the unit of mass in the SI almost-system. They'll think you're nuts, and they'll be right.) Teaching would be much easier if the same mass were called the kiloEinstein (or kE). I have no sympathy whatsoever for the term megagram. It is NOT a million mass units. The term tonne has been in use by the French for over two centuries, and it at least relates directly to the mass unit (1000 kg), unlike the indirectly related megagram (1,000,000 milli-kg). It's time for SI to clean house and get rid of that Mg abomination. Cheers, Howard ------------ Howard Hayden <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Energy Advocate www.energyadvocate.com <http://www.energyadvocate.com/> A Primer on CO2 and Climate, Second Edition ($14.95) now available at Vales Lake Publishing, LLC. www.valeslake.com <http://www.valeslake.com/> PO Box 7609 * NEW P.O. NUMBER * Pueblo West CO 81007 (fax) (719) 547-7819 People will do anything to save the world ... except take a course in science. -----Original Message----- From: Stan Jakuba [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:44 PM To: Howard Hayden Subject: Construction Newsletter Howard: Thought you should read this - and adopt the anti-tonne position. Cheers, Stan ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>; "SCC14 IEEE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Stan Jakuba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 08 Jun 23, Monday 11:13 Subject: Re: tonne Here's what I wrote in the 3rd Quarter 1997 Construction Metrication newsletter: BEHOLD THE MEGAGRAM The customary inch-pound measure for large masses is the ton. We usually think of the ton as equaling 2000 pounds, but that's just the short ton; the long ton weighs in at 2240 pounds. For power there's the ton of refrigeration and for shipping there's the register ton, a unit of volume. There's also the ton-force and the assay ton. In commercial use, the analogous measure for mass is the metric ton (or tonne). The metric ton equals 1000 kilograms or 1 000 000 grams (2204.6 pounds). Of course, the appropriate metric name for 1 000 000 grams is the megagram. While the word "megagram" may sound unfamiliar at first, it has many virtues: 1. It's the proper metric measure for large masses and, unlike the word "ton," it has no other meaning. 2. Its symbol, Mg, is simple and unambiguous. 3. It sidesteps the use of the word "ton" and the ton's possible equivalencies of 2000, 2240, and 2204.6 pounds, and it eliminates any potential confusion with power, force, and volume measures of the same name. 4. It does away with the strange "tonne," variously pronounced tun or tunnie, which, like "metric ton," is restricted to commercial use and should be avoided in construction work. So, let's avoid tons of trouble and confusion by shedding our short tons, long tons, metric tons, and tonnes and uniformly adopting the megagram. Think and write Mg.
