![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Do doctors in American medical soap operas always say "cc" (short for "cubic centimetre") to mean "millilitre" because they don't want the audience to know they're using a metric unit? At least here in Finland, "millilitre" is a much more widely known unit than "cubic centimetre", even though they're the same thing. — JIP | Talk 17:17, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
An old man such as myself remembers that many of our American textbooks of the late 1940 to pre-1970 era distinguished them as: cc = volume, ml = capacity (the latter being contingent on positive, neutral or negative meniscus formation of liquids). I hope this is some help; Dr.R.E.Petrere
I altered the OP's post stating, "Of these only the litre is still in ubiquous(sic) use." In my experience, what the OP defines as an "are" is known as a(n) "hectare", that being an area equal to 56,000m2 [1] (100mx100m). This term is used VERY widely as a pseudo-SI alternative to "acre" when talking about land and must, I would think, qualify as being in "ubiquitous" use? Also according to Google [2], an "are" is 1/100th of a hectare, or 10m2. As a result of this supporting evidence, I also altered the relevant parts of the post to reflect these values. 64.201.173.205 17:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I haven’t seen it mentioned here (or I missed it) but it seems to me that the symbols m and T can be ambiguous. mN could be 0.001 Newtons or 1 metre times Newton. Even if you introduce a rule that metres always go to the right Tm is ambiguous between 10^12 metres and 1 Tesla times metre.
Are there any rules on how to handle these? Are there more cases like this?
-- 2003:F0:8700:8400:249A:71C6:9A5A:B340 ( talk) 11:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
[ˈgɪgə] and [ˈdʒɪgə]. The former is more common than the latter. How do you know this? Seforadev 03:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Different people talk in different ways with different accents. There is therefore no standard proununciation. I have removed the relevant section. Andrew🐉( talk) 10:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
This sentence doesn't have anything even remotely official backing it up: "When an SI prefix is affixed to a root word, the prefix carries the stress, while the root drops its stress but retains a full vowel in the syllable that is stressed when the root word stands alone."
So, who says this? If it's just a common convention, then why must there be any sort of consistency. One gets the idea that someone just made this up. 08:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.56.13.119 ( talk)
I have removed the relevant section as controversial and uncited. Andrew🐉( talk) 10:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
The pronunciation section is specific to English:
... and so on.
But nowhere does it say so. Since we're defining an international set of prefixes and everything above this section applies worldwide, we really ought to make it clear that this section applies only to English. And so I'm renaming it "English pronunciation", keeping the old one-word name as an anchor so as not to break any links to it.
To discuss this, please {{Ping}} me. -- Thnidu ( talk) 04:24, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
As pronuciation is variable, controversial and uncited, I have removed the relvant section.
I propose creating a new article for the new prefix ronna. WalkingRadiance ( talk) 19:39, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Picofarad (with the symbol μμF) occurs in the "British Standard Glossary Of Terms Used In Electrical Engineering", 1926, p. 26: [3].
Nano-, giga-, tera- occur in 1932: see [4], page 252. Burzuchius ( talk) 18:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Both the Nature and the Guardian references are have issues.
Any better references would be welcome. In the interim, does anyone object to removing these? — Quondum 13:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Naughty pixies find all zebras yodelling really quietly 80.4.44.202 ( talk) 07:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
Many giant turtles plod; elegant zebras yodel really quietly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.44.202 ( talk) 20:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Do doctors in American medical soap operas always say "cc" (short for "cubic centimetre") to mean "millilitre" because they don't want the audience to know they're using a metric unit? At least here in Finland, "millilitre" is a much more widely known unit than "cubic centimetre", even though they're the same thing. — JIP | Talk 17:17, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
An old man such as myself remembers that many of our American textbooks of the late 1940 to pre-1970 era distinguished them as: cc = volume, ml = capacity (the latter being contingent on positive, neutral or negative meniscus formation of liquids). I hope this is some help; Dr.R.E.Petrere
I altered the OP's post stating, "Of these only the litre is still in ubiquous(sic) use." In my experience, what the OP defines as an "are" is known as a(n) "hectare", that being an area equal to 56,000m2 [1] (100mx100m). This term is used VERY widely as a pseudo-SI alternative to "acre" when talking about land and must, I would think, qualify as being in "ubiquitous" use? Also according to Google [2], an "are" is 1/100th of a hectare, or 10m2. As a result of this supporting evidence, I also altered the relevant parts of the post to reflect these values. 64.201.173.205 17:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I haven’t seen it mentioned here (or I missed it) but it seems to me that the symbols m and T can be ambiguous. mN could be 0.001 Newtons or 1 metre times Newton. Even if you introduce a rule that metres always go to the right Tm is ambiguous between 10^12 metres and 1 Tesla times metre.
Are there any rules on how to handle these? Are there more cases like this?
-- 2003:F0:8700:8400:249A:71C6:9A5A:B340 ( talk) 11:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
[ˈgɪgə] and [ˈdʒɪgə]. The former is more common than the latter. How do you know this? Seforadev 03:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Different people talk in different ways with different accents. There is therefore no standard proununciation. I have removed the relevant section. Andrew🐉( talk) 10:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
This sentence doesn't have anything even remotely official backing it up: "When an SI prefix is affixed to a root word, the prefix carries the stress, while the root drops its stress but retains a full vowel in the syllable that is stressed when the root word stands alone."
So, who says this? If it's just a common convention, then why must there be any sort of consistency. One gets the idea that someone just made this up. 08:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.56.13.119 ( talk)
I have removed the relevant section as controversial and uncited. Andrew🐉( talk) 10:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
The pronunciation section is specific to English:
... and so on.
But nowhere does it say so. Since we're defining an international set of prefixes and everything above this section applies worldwide, we really ought to make it clear that this section applies only to English. And so I'm renaming it "English pronunciation", keeping the old one-word name as an anchor so as not to break any links to it.
To discuss this, please {{Ping}} me. -- Thnidu ( talk) 04:24, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
As pronuciation is variable, controversial and uncited, I have removed the relvant section.
I propose creating a new article for the new prefix ronna. WalkingRadiance ( talk) 19:39, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Picofarad (with the symbol μμF) occurs in the "British Standard Glossary Of Terms Used In Electrical Engineering", 1926, p. 26: [3].
Nano-, giga-, tera- occur in 1932: see [4], page 252. Burzuchius ( talk) 18:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Both the Nature and the Guardian references are have issues.
Any better references would be welcome. In the interim, does anyone object to removing these? — Quondum 13:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Naughty pixies find all zebras yodelling really quietly 80.4.44.202 ( talk) 07:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
Many giant turtles plod; elegant zebras yodel really quietly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.44.202 ( talk) 20:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)