• alvvayson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    205
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    A megagram is 1000 kg, by definition. It’s symbol is Mg.

    In metric countries, we just use the word “ton” as shorthand/slang for it, since it is an easier term and was well known.

    The only reason the US calls it a metric ton, is because they have archaic units (long and short tons).

    Metric countries don’t call it a metric ton.

  • aulin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s nothing wrong with doing so. Perfectly up to you, and everyone would know how much it is.

  • DeeKhenbawls@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I sometimes use millitonne (mt) instead of kilogram to keep people on their toes. I’ve learned that some people doesn’t like to have their weight measured in any kind of tonne.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As someone not born to the metric system but who’s tried to lean into it, this is something I’ve always found a little difficult. “A thousandth of a meter” isn’t a useful concept to me. I don’t think we are good at conceiving of things in their thousands, with good proportionality. I would rather just have a singular name like “squajibbles” for milimeters and memorize an intuitive sense of what that is. I realize I can do that with the word “milimeters” too but my brain sometimes gets stuck on unpacking the math. I was reading Dune last night and the expression “millions of decaliters” really stopped me in my tracks. I felt like I had to start with one liter, a sodastream bottle, and multiply it up. I’d rather have some concept like “fuckajiter” which means an Olympic swimming pool and work with that.

      Not really being critical here. Metric is better. But intuitiveness is one of the qualities of a measurements system that makes it more or less appealing and I’ve always found imperial has a slight edge there that makes it harder to just drop as a complete loser of a system.

      EDIT: yes, internet, I know the only legal thing to say about metric / imperial is that metric is the only system and imperial is for American asshole cavemen. Oh well. Fuck me for offering thoughts from someone trying to move to metric. I should hide my shame.

      • Pixel of Life@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would rather just have a singular name like “squajibbles” for milimeters and memorize an intuitive sense of what that is. I realize I can do that with the word “milimeters” too but my brain sometimes gets stuck on unpacking the math.

        This is, in fact, exactly what metric users do in their daily lives… We don’t do math in our heads every time we measure something. We know from experience how large all the units are and pick the one that’s appropriate for a given situation, just like you do.

        When you measure something using inches, you don’t then say “it’s this many 1/36ths of a yard” unless you specifically need to convert it into yards for some reason.

        Similarly, when we measure something using millimeters, we don’t say “it’s this many 1/1000ths of a meter”. It’s just a millimeter. Don’t get hung up on the prefix, just ignore it and treat it as a unit of a particular size.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I figured that’s what people born to metric do. It’s different when you’re learning it as an outsider, as an adult consciously absorbing the system.

          • tunetardis@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            As a Canadian with a living memory of when we made the switch here, I feel your pain. Though to be fair, I was a child at the time and so probably had an easier time of it? But in some ways, I’m still transitioning to this day!

            Take temperature, for example. When Canada went metric, all the weather reports switched to Celsius but our indoor thermometers and thermostat were still in Fahrenheit. So I wound up in a situation in which outdoor extreme temperatures became more relatable in C, while typical indoor temperature ranges sounded better in F. I particularly liked winter temperatures in C. It was so intuitive that < 0 means snow and > 0 means rain.

            Today, I am more comfortable with C for indoors as well, but not for cooking. I guess that’s because a lot of recipes still say set the oven to 350 or check the meat on the grill is at least 160?

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The point isn’t to have an intuitive sense of what a millimeter is just by knowing what a meter is. You have to learn both units individually to have intuition about them. The point is to know that a measurement of 500mm is 0.5m without having to do any math in your head beyond moving a decimal point.

      • Shialac@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I dont see a Millimeter as a thousandth of a meter, I see it as a tenth of a centimeter

        Scale is what matters. when I measure something in meters I dont care about the exact millimeters

      • Hector_McG@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Coming from the UK generation that grew up during the decimalisation process, and therefore being equally comfortable with both systems, imperial measures are far less intuitive than metric. Don’t mistake simply being being used to something as it being intuitive.

        We use a base 10 numeric system because that’s how many fingers & thumbs we have. Having a system of weights and measures based on that decimal system, is far more intuitive than a system that scales up through orders of distance using different scaling factors at ever order, is so unintuitive as to be absurd.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Right but if basing things on our hands makes them intuitive, it’s hard to beat “hands” and “feet” for human scale relatability.

          As a craftsman, I live milimeters for precision. Very useful and easy to work with. I hate not having anything between centimeters and meters though. I know decimeters exist but nothing’s ever listed that way and so it isn’t something I’ve developed any intuitive sense of.

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            When I sent some measurements to my uncle to make a bed, I sent it in 200cm x 160cm. Not 2m or 20 dm. You know those exchanges because it’s obvious but since people are used to cm for height, it’s useful to compare stuff with yourself and that’s why cm is the most used measurement for craft.

            If whatever you are building fits in a hand, measurements will probably come in mm, because idk why but people enjoy 3 digit measurements.

          • magikmw@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Me, my wife, my child all have differently sized feet and hands.

            Tbh, as an european I kinda absorbed a lot of imperial by just living on the anglophone internet, and honestly have nothing good to say about it.

            I can intuitively guesstimate what a mile, yard, foot and inch are in metric, and I do, because it’s useful in my particular corner of the Internet, not because it’s a good system.

            I have no idea what a gallon, stone, lbs or oz are. Volume of itself is kinda unintuitive, same with weight. Can’t be bothered.

      • gazter@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Intuitiveness comes with usage. When I think of a kilometre, I don’t think of a lot of metres, I just think of it as a single unit. A centimetre doesn’t send me dividing metres, I just think of a length about the width of a fingernail.

      • ben_dover@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        if you actually use the metric system, millimeter would become that “singular name” you memorize for a certain length. but you could also tell from the name alone what’s it about roughly, squajibbles on the other hand…

      • Pantoffel@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You just named the main advantage of the metric system as unintuitive and the opposite (squajibbles, fuckajiter, feet, toes, elbows) as the main advantage of the imperial system. Yet, you say that metric is better. I don’t understand. Why do you find metric better then?

        I understand that intuitiveness is subjective and that how a person is raised or lectured alters the view on what is intuitive. From a logical perspective, however, I find the metric system much more intuitive as the names of the metrics denote exactly what we are dealing with (except for the case of tonnes). Yes, maybe the wording is confusing. But from the word itself you can infer what is meant, given you know what milli, giga, mega, nano, pico, etc mean. Its just times or divided by 1000. What is feet in miles or nautical miles? Gotta look that up!

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well metric is obviously better for conversions which helps a great deal. I think my intuition problem either goes away with extensive use or being born to it.

          I do really like the “foot” as a highly human-relatable unit. At 4 feet tall, a man is aberrantly small or a dwarf. At 5 feet tall, a man is normal but short. At six feet high, a man is tall. At 7 feet tall, he is aberrantly big. It’s a highly usable human scale thing and there isn’t a great analogue in metric. Maybe you get used to decimeters (wait… decameters?) too but they are less commonly used. Giving someone’s height in centimeters has never gotten familiar for me. And the deca/deci thing I think undermines your intuitive point a little. These are easily confused.

          I think millimeters and milliliters are great for precision. Imperial sucks below 1 inch or 1 ounce. All fraction bullshit.

          So each system has its pluses on intuition. But metric has the conversions advantage and the precision advantage so that’s what wins for me.

      • Ghoelian@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wait isn’t imperial the one with asinine fractions?

        Like wtf is a 64th of an inch? Or a thousandth (is that how you spell that?)

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    I noticed this with vehicles. Odo has 100,000 km on it? Nah, it’s 100 megameters. It just sounds cooler

  • Eheran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Units closer related to everyday stuff are those that stick around. Like horse power or km. People don’t use Mm but instead 1’000s of km, even into the million km for cars. Even in space they still tend to use km like for the distance to the moon or sun. Only once the distances get absurdly large is there a shift to either another unit (light years) or the use of different notation (like 3.14E12 m).

    • aulin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As a Swede, using units that give numbers above ~100 starts to get unwieldy. Hence why we use mil (1 Scandinavian mile = 10 km) once we get to triple digits in km. “It’s 60 mil to Stockholm” is immensely more natural than “it’s 600 km to Stockholm”.

      • tunetardis@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is fascinating! I had heard of the “metric mile” as being 1500m: the closest you can get to running a statute mile at international competitions.

        But I like this 10km mile idea! We could use something like that here in Canada. Sometimes we say “klick” here to mean km, so I have tossed around terms like “decaklick” and “hectoklick” but people look at me funny.

        • aulin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          We’ve had different mil definitions in Scandinavia before, but at some point Sweden and Norway agreed to unite at 10 km, which is a really useful unit. Denmark just didn’t do it. They’ll give distances in hundreds of kilometers.

          I love this! Let’s use all the prefixes!

          It’s always been a pet peeve of mine that Sweden is seemingly the only country that uses dl (deciliter) and hg (hectogram, but we just say hekto, just like with kilo), which are to me vastly more useful units as they’re close to what you’re measuring. 2 hg salami or candy or whatever instead of 200 g, and 3 dl water instead of 30 cl or, god forbid, 300 ml.

          I see cooking shows from countries that normally use imperial, using metric by measuring everything in milliliters. It makes no sense! No recipe needs that resolution.

    • too_high_for_this@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The astronomical unit AU is commonly used for things in the solar system. 1 AU is roughly the average distance to the sun, about 150 000 000 km

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get the joke. But it does not actually work. The unit is meter (to some power) but it is not the same meter. One is for a specific liquid, the other for a driving distance. That information was just omitted to begin with, since everyone knows what is meant with the regular units/expression. But when you would want to do that, you need to put that information back at the end.

    • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know the metre has been defined by earth’s size, or other various things, all rather arbitrary. Wouldn’t it make sense to define it by the speed of light and a light year, divided into even portions? Start by dividing a light year (in a vacuum) by ten, and keep dividing by ten until we get a unit that is close to the useful size we are accustomed to?

      That way we could scale up, and I suppose that’s going to be useful in the future.

      • Kethal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s already defined that way - from Wikipedia "From 1983 until 2019, the metre was formally defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299792458 of a second. After the 2019 redefinition of the SI base units, this definition was rephrased to include the definition of a second in terms of the caesium frequency ΔνCs. "

        • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Just because it’s defined as some section of a light year does not mean it’s using a light year as a reference. You could use a foot and find the fraction of a light year that represents it, but that doesn’t mean that the foot is based on a light year.

          I’m saying the short measure that we use on a daily basis might be a BASE 10 portion of a light year. Not 1/299792458 of a light second.

          P.S. It’s like being on Reddit, being download for conjecturing.

          • Kethal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I see what you mean. That is just as arbitrary as using the Earth’s size or any other reference. There’s nothing special about a year.

              • accidental@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                it’s a hard thing for me to wrap my head around, but it’s cool when you think about it: there’s actually no possible shared reference; even with atomic clocks, based solely on the bouncing of cesium atoms ticking away, the distance travelled is dependent on acceleration in your reference frame.

                relativity really is!

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Am not sure I completely agree with you. Some of the archaic units are still used because USA is so dominant in both technology and advertisement. People living in other parts of the world know exactly how much inch is or gallon. Just like most of the world knows English, even though it’s not the easiest language to learn. Simply GB was too big and influential and they left their mark.

      As far as Mm is concerned, why would you do that? If you were making a small panorama or model you wouldn’t use 0.00001km, would you? You pick units that are most convenient for the purpose. Kilometers are used for cars and things related to traveling because fuel economy is expressed in such unit, car’s own computer measures distance in same unit, speed is measured in same unit. Why would anyone use anything else? 0km until 1000km is perfectly intuitive scale which doesn’t get crossed too much. For the very same reason that’s why we use square meters to measure surface of a home, because they never go into square kilometers. And square milimeters is pointless.

      It’s all about practicality. SI system is great because it allows users to use same unit in different scale and have it be intuitive and easy to convert. Also when it comes to astronomy, there are many units you skipped there. LY is too big and rarely used unless it’s to describe distances to other galaxies and size of those. There are AU as some one else mentioned. Earth size, etc. But rest assured when scientists are trying to calculate something, they still revert to good old reliable SI system.

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nobody knows what a gallon/yard/… is outside the USA.

        English is super easy.

        I don’t get your stance on Mm. First you use it for tiny values and say that is stupid. Then you hint that going above 1’000 km the km should not be used anymore. Also, 1’000 km are nothing in terms of vehicles etc., driving that distance in one day is nothing super special. A car does 100s of 1’000 km. Hence my point.

        I didn’t skip anything, I named some examples to prove or better explain my point.

  • grte@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Megagram is the official SI term for the weight. Metric tonne is non-SI but happens to be equivalent to a megagram and became the more common parlance (where I am, at least) by historical accident.

    • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Pretty sure they tried to mimic existing units/terms to make it “easier”. So they used tonne to mimic ton.

      • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        They didn’t mimic existing units, an imperial ton is close to a metric ton, and the spelling tonne is just an alternative spelling of ton. In some parts ton means imperial ton, and tonne means metric ton, but it’s not standardized. In German, where the word originally comes from, it’s Tonne (btw the e is not silent, it’s [ɛ] as in let. Or in Porsche (no, it’s not pronounced porsh…).)

        • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They mimicked existing terms, otherwise we wouldn’t have ever had the term metric tonne. It would have been called a megagram.

    • PowerSeries@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      The moon is 400Mm away. Never say thousand kilometers again, the mega is the way.

      Imaging if we started saying millions of kilobytes instead of GB.

  • lemmy689@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I like metric wrenches, if my 5mm doesnt fit I can try the 6mm. Most nuts and bolds are not metric, so I end up figuring what comes next if my 1/2" doesn’t fit. is it like 33/64th? 34/64th? 17/32nd?

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    What is this metric shit? I’m an American! I measure weight in American units like the hundredweight and the truss and the slug!

  • WestHej@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    After reading the comments, I’ve noticed a point that is missing from the other comments. We like to measure things relative to other things. Therefore we should use a unit of measure which you can compare the entire range of expected values for that question simply.

    For example how far away is my nearest town centre? 1km. How far away is the nearest city? 10km. How far is it across the country? 500km, How far is it across the continent? 5,000km. How far is it around the equator? 40,000km.

    By using all km in this case it’s easy to get an idea of the relative distances. But you wouldn’t measure your height as 0.0018km. Just my own thoughts!

  • randy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m an engineer, and I make it a point to teach young engineers that “a ton” can mean any one of three things:

    • Short ton = 2000 lb
    • Long ton = 2240 lb
    • Metric ton = 1000 kg = ~2204 lb

    And which is being used is often not spelled out, but is just known from context, and usually should be clarified. I once nearly got in trouble by thinking a measurement was in short tons when it was actually metric tons.

    So my own act of rebellion is to use “Mg” when I’m writing my personal notes.

    • Treczoks@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is metric ton and this imperial shit. And thanks to metric being highly systematic, “Mg” (megagrams) is actually correct - “ton” is just a shorthand.

  • Scrollone@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    In Italian schools they teach it as Megagram, since ton is an old term which is non compliant with the SI