At 24 03 06, 09:24 PM, Pat Naughtin wrote:
The fact is that we live in a living sea of language. As promoters of the
metric system we strive to promote a single measurement method that is clear
open and fair to all who use it. In short: 'For all people; for all time.
However, other people simply play with words as they encounter them with
little or no understanding of their underlying systemic structure.
While I agree with Pat in what he says above, I think the situation
is more complex than just lack of understanding. If you compare USC
(US customary) units to metric unit, or even "official" metric units
to a variety of "slang" metric units, one things jumps out: people
tend to like and use single-syllable units.
USC v. Metric
inch, quart, pint, yard, mile, knot
centimeter, liter, milliliter, meter, kilometer, kilometer per hour
Slang v. Metric
klick, nit, ums, carbs
kilometer, candela per square meter, micrometer, grams of carbohydrate
Or even USC v. Slang USC: "mils" instead of thousandths of an inch
Not all of these are due to ignorance; I suspect most people who use
"klick" are perfectly aware that is short for "kilometer." Certainly
any engineer who uses "nit" knows it is a candela per square meter.
Any machinist knows what a "mil" is.
My point is this: our measurement system should SERVE us, not impede
us. SI is dramatically better than any alternative from a technical
standpoint at serving us, but one of its weaknesses is the length of
the various names. Where a lengthy name is used frequently in a
profession (e.g., nit), I think it is inevitable that some shorthand
slang word will develop. Not due to ignorance, but due to convenience.
Since I think this is inevitable, I also think we (and the BIPM)
should embrace it so we can help control it. Just hoping it won't
happen is fruitless.
Jim
Jim Elwell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
801-466-8770
www.qsicorp.com
