Stan, you have been after this for several years. No takers. Don't you think
it is time to give up?
----- Original Message -----
From: "STANLEY DOORE" <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: 09 Apr 10, Friday 05:40
Subject: [USMA:44505] Re: FPLA 2010
I am NOT advocating larger multiple units than the kL (m^3). Larger
multiples than the kL would be too complex, cumbersome and not
user-friendly.
Virtually all people are accustomed to the L and submultiples thereof
as they buy medicine and products in stores.
The kL would be very useful for things such as rain barrels, ponds,
stream flow and other every day things to which people can relate. People
can relate to the kL which is a clean and useful expression of everyday
large volume. In the case of river flow and water and sewage systems, the
use of gallons per minute are incomprehensible because it has no easy
direct relationship to SI volume whereas kL (cubic meters) do. The use
of L and not kL is also incomprehensible for stream flow because the
numbers are so large.
The NIST should be the leader in advocating the use of kL in the public
domain. The cubic meter and multiples and submultiples thereof should be
used in engineering and science.
To be consistent, those who do not advocate the use of the kL for
everyday use also should be against the use of the L and submultiples
thereof.
Stan Doore
----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 2:02 PM
Subject: [USMA:44488] Re: FPLA 2010
Stan and Pierre,
I think you have some good arguments for allowing larger multiples of the
liter in *common parlance*.
If you are able to persuade the CCU, CIPM, and NIST to accept multiples
greater than one, I'll be among the last to object, but in Science and
Technology, I'm with John. The coherence of SI is more important,
without the liter and its multiples, except, perhaps, in medical
practice.
Gene.
---- Original message ----
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 10:39:48 -0400
From: Pierre Abbat <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:44483] Re: FPLA 2010
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
On Wednesday 08 April 2009 08:32:21 STANLEY DOORE wrote:
I disagree with the NIST in the case of kL because L is used widely and
well known in the public sector. Are you suggesting that mm^3 be
used
instead of L? Stan Doore
I too disagree with the NIST. A liter is a cubic decimeter, a kiloliter
is a
cubic meter, a megaliter is a cubic decameter, a gigaliter is a cubic
hectometer, a teraliter is a cubic kilometer, a petaliter is a cubic -
what?
You can't express the petaliter as the cube of a named unit. Likewise the
exaliter. Contrariwise, you can't express the cubic yottameter or cubic
zeptometer as a prefixed liter.
As to the tonne, I wouldn't use it with any prefix. There are so many
kinds of
tons and tuns that just saying "tonne" instead of "megagram" is not worth
the
loss of clarity.
The stere has been deprecated, but I think it's still useful as a jargon
unit,
since it has only one syllable compared to four for both alternatives. I
still sometimes think in steres, since my father grew up with the unit.
Pierre
