I prefer the cubic meter. It can be visualized, and it is derived directly
from one of the actual seven base units of the SI. I heard a reporter talk
about thousands of liters of spilled oil, but if he said "cubic meters," I
would really feel it more.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Hall" <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: 11 June, 2010 10:14
Subject: [USMA:47707] Volume in metric
These remarks are prompted by the "Oil spill" thread which lead to a
discussion on units of volume.
The litre (or liter of you prefer) has, IMHO, a lot going for it as a
general purpose unit for most ranges. Its main advantage is the avoidance
of the superscripted 3 for plain text messaging. It is also easily
converted to cubic metres when that is required (just divide by 1000). I
have to say I don't like the dam³ that has been suggested. I don't see why
the megalitre or ML won't do just as well.
We then have:
1 m³ = 1 kL
1 dam³ = 1 ML
1 hm³ = 1 GL
1 km³ = 1 TL
Simple yes?
