Take a look at the second table at http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html.
Note that byte is represented by a B, but bit is simply bit. There is no shorter form for bit than bit (which, as I already said, is already an abbreviation for binary digit, and therefore suitable for use as a symbol). A b, on its own, is already the SI symbol for the non-SI unit, barn (NOT the symbol for bar, which is bar). Barn is an extremely tiny unit of area (100 fm^2), and is currently accepted for use with SI. Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Behalf Of Chimpsarecute >Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 21:34 >To: U.S. Metric Association >Subject: [USMA:27962] Re: Mixed Bag on Mars > > >Are you sure? See Rowlett: > >bit (b) [1] >the basic unit of the amount of data. Each bit records one of the two >possible answers to a single question: "0" or "1," "yes" or "no," "on" or >"off." When data is represented as binary (base-2) numbers, each binary >digit is a single bit. In fact, the word "bit" was coined by the American >statistician and computer scientist John Tukey (b. 1915) in 1946 as an >acronym for binary digit. Somewhat more generally, the bit is used as a >logarithmic unit of data storage capacity, equal to the base-2 logarithm of >the number of possible states of the storage device or location. For >example, if a storage location stores one letter, then it has 26 possible >states, and its storage capacity is log2 26 = 4.7004 bits. > >Are you suggesting "b" can not be used for bit because the "b" is already >used for bar? But bar is not an SI unit so it should not matter if 'b" is >used for bit as there is no conflict with an SI unit symbol. > >I wonder if the BIPM could ever consider making the bit the SI >base unit for >the amount of data. The binary SI prefixes would then be applied and be in >perfect harmony with the way binary numbers are expressed. Even if the >Base-10 prefixes are applied they would have the same meaing as >they do with >other units. > >Euric > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Bill Potts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, 2003-12-24 23:52 >Subject: [USMA:27961] Re: Mixed Bag on Mars > > >> Euric wrote: >> Transmission rates are in kbps instead of kb/s. >> >> Actually, that should be kbit/s. The last time I looked, there was no >formal >> agreement on a symbol for bit (which is already a compressed form of >"binary >> digit" -- and therefore, potentially, a 3-letter symbol). (Of course, >given >> that bit is a discrete element and not a unit of measure, it's not SI.) >> >> International standards bodies have been using bit/s, kbit/s and Mbit/s >for >> years. Recently, they've also been using Gbit/s. Tbit/s isn't too far >away. >> >> One of the worst atrocities I've seen is Kb (which a highly-qualified >> engineer insisted was both correct and appropriate), where kbit/s was >> intended. Kbs is almost as bad. >> >> There is agreement on B, for byte. >> >> Bill Potts, CMS >> Roseville, CA >> http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >> >> >
