I fully agree with James Wentworth and Jim Frysinger. In the first place I want metric to win against the forces of ifp and I want it to be as *practical* and as *perfect* as possible, that means some concessions on both points. This means that I have nothing at all against the metric ton, the hectare and the liter. I use them and no way that I will ever give them up. They are practical and convenient units, permitted alongside SI. In the UK the 'ton' is now no longer the long, but the metric one. We can and should do away with trash like the 'metric' horsepower, the mmHg, and outdated units like the calorie.
Change the name of the kilogram and fiddle with megagrams as a replacement for the metric ton and the BWMA, F2M and ACWM will have a field day. It will suit their propaganda enormously. The decimeter may be used here and there in Europe but that is very sporadic. The centimeter is the 'inch-like' unit here in the timber and other trades. It was officially called the 'Dutch inch' when we went metric in 1820, then slowly its proper name took over. I would also strongly advise against doing away with the cemtimeter. Just use it or the millimeter at your convenience. Han ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Wentworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, 2002-12-21 14:42 Subject: [USMA:24137] Megagram, shmegagram!!! > Hello All, > > I feel strongly compelled to comment on the many recent posts concerning unit names (megagram vs. metric ton vs. tonne, "What shall we re-name the kilogram?," "Are the hectare and liter SI-kosher?", etc.). > > As far as I can tell, I am the only one on this list who is *not* a highly-educated professional. I currently work as a parking lot attendant, my schooling ended after two years of college, and my real education has been "the school of hard knocks." My socio-economic status gives me a more realistic perspective on what will work and what won't work to expedite US metrication since I am, for practical purposes, a "Joe Sixpack." Here are six observations: [1] Using the megagram (and its symbol Mg) instead of the metric ton or tonne is a *very* bad idea. Americans are quite familiar with the milligram (mg) from food nutritional labels and labels on medications, and the Mg symbol will just confuse many people (mg, kg, and km are sometimes incorrectly expressed as MG, KG, and KM in other countries as well as in the US). Americans are familiar with the metric ton (or at least with hearing the words), so we'd better stick with it at least until it becomes "the" ton we use. Once that happens, we can usefully debate the merits of using the name tonne instead. > > [2] Re-name the kilogram? Forget it! Every American has at least heard of the unit, so it would be folly to try to re-name it now. More importantly, 96% of the world's people also know it as the kilogram, and everyone except a tiny number of metrological purists seems to be perfectly happy with it. > > [3] Trying to retire the hectare and liter would be very foolish. They may not be pure SI, but billions of people happily use these units every day. > The hectare seems to be a perfectly practical size for farmers' fields and other large tracts of property. The hectare isn't yet familiar to most Americans, but my fellow citizens are comfortable with the liter. Calling it the cubic decimeter (dm3) instead of the liter would only confuse and anger many Americans, and for what? Speaking of the decimeter... > > [4] The decimeter should be included in any program to popularize the metric system in America. The most common complaint I've heard and read from tradesmen is that "the meter is too big and the centimeter is too small." Like Baby Bear's porridge, the decimeter would be "just right." It is close enough to the inch in size that carpenters and plumbers (more of those "Joe Sixpacks") would more readily accept metric rulers if they had three unit sizes to choose from (dm, cm, and mm). Even the USMA's Swiss-made metric tapes are demarcated in decimeters by printing each decimeter in a different background color, so the decimeter must be used at least somewhat in Europe. > > [5] If you were to ask 100 randomly-chosen Americans about the metric system, all of them would say they've heard of it, and many of them would even be familiar with the commonly-used units. However, I doubt if even 5 of the 100 would have heard of SI. For this reason, all US metrication efforts should only use the terms "metric" and "metric system" in the titles of pamphlets, press releases, radio & television productions, and web pages. > When you're trying to introduce something that is new or unfamiliar to a group of people, calling it by its most well-known name will go a long way toward making your audience comfortable with it. (How many laypeople at a planetarium show would know what "Luna" and "Sol" are, even though they see them in the sky several times every week? That's why they are called "The Moon" and "The Sun" in planetarium shows.) > > [6] For weather reporting in the US, the hectopascal should be used as a 1:1 "drop-in" replacement for the millibar. The millibar is so seldom used here for public weather reports that there would be no familiarity issue with replacing it. > > The perfect is often the enemy of the adequate. The metric system unit names may not be perfect, but they are good enough as they are. The purist arguments I've read in the postings are well-meant, but the proposed unit name changes would play right into the FFU--ers' hands. I hope I haven't come across as angry; it's just that all of the unit-name postings remind me of a hamster running in an excercise wheel. His feet move rapidly and the wheel spins like a dreidel and squeaks loudly, but he doesn't get ywhere. -- Jason
