I much prefer and recommend kkg rather than Mg because it is closer to coherent SI. Since kg is already an exception as a unit symbol, violation of the "no double prefix" rule is not a problem in this case.
Gene. ---- Original message ---- >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:26:23 -0500 >From: "Stan Jakuba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [USMA:40261] Re: Tonnes >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > >Yes, of course. Thank you Bill. Sorry for the typo. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Bill Hooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Stan Jakuba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: 08 Jan 27, Sunday 13:33 >Subject: Re: [USMA:40211] Re: Tonnes > > >> >> On 2008 Jan 26 , at 4:00 PM, Stan Jakuba wrote: >> >>> Anybody can and will be comfortable with MG if the other nicknames >>> disappear. >> >> Ooops! You meant "Mg", did you not? >> >>> Let's be consistent among us to start with, and expand our horizons >>> outside the English speaking word. SI is the ultimate goal and these >>> silly modifications, some with the blessing of BIPM, are only >>> complicating things and fuel anti-metric sentiments in the US. >> >> I whole heartedly agree. >> >> >> Bill Hooper >> 73 kg body mass* >> Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA >> >> * plus or minus a kilogram or so. >> >> >> >
