Terry:
You are the first who has felt the appathy of students who have already crossed their college and are NOW at cross-roads to figure out *what is right* - micrometre or micrometer to measure distances! Likewise litre/liter.... etc. Why can't the BIPM and CCU be approached to issue a "Papal like Bull" for use of Le Systeme Internationale d'Unites.
Brij

From: "Terry Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [USMA:23932] micrometre/micrometer
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:26:11 -0000

John David Galt wrote:
>>You would need to say 0.1 millimetre or 100 micrometre.
>                                                         ^^^^^^^^^^
>Shouldn't that word be micron?


I know that the word 'micron' is widespread use. However, as others have
indicated, it should no longer be used. It was abolished in 1968. See:

http://www.bipm.org/pdf/si-brochure.pdf
http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/200/202/metrsty3.htm
http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/200/202/fs376-b.pdf


The SI system attempts to avoid special names for units. You go from
millimetre to micrometre to nanometre and the meaning is clear and
compatible with other things (e.g. millifarad, microfarad, nanofarad).
Micron stands on its own and needs knowledge that is not transferable.


>At least in the USA, a "micrometer" is a gadget for measuring
>small distances, not a distance itself.

Yes. Both meanings of the word apply in the UK. However, in the UK the
length is spelled 'micrometre' and the device is spelled micrometer. The
US spelling is identical for both.

Acoustically, I would expect the emphasis on the first syllable for the
length and the second for the device.

If you search for the phrases:
micrometre-size
micrometer-size
you will find plenty of results
(note that a hyphen is meaningful in google).

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Reply via email to