Flaws with the Metric System

[jcb]

(0) I am an American, so I almost never use the metric system in normal everyday life, but I have much training in math/science, so I still encounter the metric system in those contexts. So, these are my complaints about the metric system. Let me know what you think, and if you have any of your own.
(1) Sometimes upper case and lower case versions for letters stand for different prefixes, like m=milli, but M=mega. (And sometimes it doesn't matter, like for k=kilo.), This matters, because there are times when writing in the Latin alphabet that only *upper case* letters are used for stylistic reasons, such as signs. For example: (Note the technically incorrect upper case "KM" instead of correct "km".)

There's also other contexts, like casual emails, or text messaging, where only *lower case* letters are used. Imo, relying on case to distinguish meaning is just a recipe for confusion.
(2) It uses a mu (μ) from the Greek alphabet for the prefix "micro". Most (average) Americans are unfamiliar with the Greek alphabet, and the standard American keyboard lacks the ability to type any of its letters easily. I've recently noticed that a common solution to this is to use "mc" instead of "μ" as the prefix for "micro".
(3) Meters and liters are useful amounts to measure things on a typical human scale, but grams are not. Instead, one must use *kilo*grams. Imo, what we call a "kilogram" should've been called a "gram". This also prevents "kilogram" from having a short pithy word to refer to it, unless you use...
(4) "kilogram" is shortened to "kilo" in casual speech, but there's no reason why "kilo" couldn't refer to any unit with the "kilo" prefix, like "kilometer" or "kiloliter".
(5) "are" means 100 m^2, instead of 1 m^2. Again, imo, what we call a "centare" should've been called an "are".
(6) "are" is already an English word, causing confusion.
(7) Why is "tonne" (aka "metric ton") used instead of "megagram" ?

[Zju]

None of these have caused any issues to me.

[Ares Land]

In retrospect the gram / kilogram thing is clearly a design flaw. Interestingly the basic unit is the kilogram; and if Wikipedia is correct in an early version of the system the basic unit was the grave (about 1 kg.) Too late to change it now!

Ares and hectares are horribly confusing. I think they made sense in a largely agricultural society (such as 1790s France.)

[Darren]

Despite being Australian, I've always used imperial for anything length-related - miles, inches, feet, acres, mph, mpg; while volume, weight and temperature I use metric. All Australians use feet and inches for height, and most use them for rough distances and estimates and a few other purposes which should not be mentioned in polite company. Where I work all the hardware is imperial cos all the quality stuff is American, so we still use it there too. And old people use imperial. Also I've never met a human being who uses kW instead of horsepower.

I have to disagree with most of your points though. There's a difference between "literal metric used by scientists" and "metric used by people". Real people (in Australia) basically just use the following system

	Small things	Medium sized things	Big things
Length	mills (mm), centimetres (cm) inches	metres (m) feet	kays (km) rarely miles
Weight	grams (g)	kilos (kg)	tons (you'd only ever abbreviate it as "t")
Speed		kaypeehaitch (km/h)
Area	square mills (mm^2)	square metres (m^2)	acres
Volume	mills (mL)	litres (L) pints (for beer; although a pint isn't a pint here, it's half a pint)	kegs (for beer) occasionally gallons, although no-one really knows what one is

The only metric thing about Metric is the size of the units and the fact that they're decimal.

A few flaws I will mention are that:
- Cms are too small and metres are too big
- Litres are a bit too big; having a drink-sized unit is useful
- Hectares are the devil's invention and have no place in god-fearing society
- There's nothing in the vicinity of a stone, which would be fairly useful
- Km just aren't as juicy as miles
- "litres per hundred kilometres" is just silly

[xxx]

I agree with those flaws but see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internati ... m_of_Units
1/ it's impossible to avoid incorrect signage ...
2/ micro is not a useful subdivision for everyday measurements...
3/ kilogram is the unit for mass...
4/ omissions can't be avoided......
5/6/7/ are and ton are not international system units (m² and 1x10³kg)...

[Raphael]

(0) I am an American, so I almost never use the metric system in normal everyday life, but I have much training in math/science, so I still encounter the metric system in those contexts. So, these are my complaints about the metric system. Let me know what you think, and if you have any of your own.
(1) Sometimes upper case and lower case versions for letters stand for different prefixes, like m=milli, but M=mega. (And sometimes it doesn't matter, like for k=kilo.), This matters, because there are times when writing in the Latin alphabet that only *upper case* letters are used for stylistic reasons, such as signs. For example: (Note the technically incorrect upper case "KM" instead of correct "km".)

There's also other contexts, like casual emails, or text messaging, where only *lower case* letters are used. Imo, relying on case to distinguish meaning is just a recipe for confusion.

Before I read your post, I didn't even know about the m/M distinction, and I've used the metric system for all my life.. And how does the sign in the photo you posted cause confusion? What else could "KM" mean in that context?

(2) It uses a mu (μ) from the Greek alphabet for the prefix "micro". Most (average) Americans are unfamiliar with the Greek alphabet, and the standard American keyboard lacks the ability to type any of its letters easily. I've recently noticed that a common solution to this is to use "mc" instead of "μ" as the prefix for "micro".

Outside of engineering, who ever uses "micro"?

(3) Meters and liters are useful amounts to measure things on a typical human scale, but grams are not. Instead, one must use *kilo*grams. Imo, what we call a "kilogram" should've been called a "gram". This also prevents "kilogram" from having a short pithy word to refer to it, unless you use...

I think some of the smaller things in daily live, such as individual pieces of small consumer electronics, are closer in scale to grams than to kilograms. Anyway, a lot of food is sold in amounts smaller than a kilogram, so grams are practical measurements for it: The phrase "a 750 gram bread" is shorter than the phrase "a 750 milligram bread".

(4) "kilogram" is shortened to "kilo" in casual speech, but there's no reason why "kilo" couldn't refer to any unit with the "kilo" prefix, like "kilometer" or "kiloliter".

Oh, I think in Australian English, "kilo" is sometimes used for "kilometer". Anyway, as long as people know what other people usually mean by a word, why would the underlying logic or lack thereof matter?

(5) "are" means 100 m^2, instead of 1 m^2. Again, imo, what we call a "centare" should've been called an "are".

Except that no one actually calls it a "centare". It's called a "square meter". Which is a perfectly fine term, easier to understand that either "centare" or "are".

(6) "are" is already an English word, causing confusion.

You mean, as opposed to the words "foot" and "yard", which have no meanings outside of measurements? Anyway, as far as I can tell, few people ever use "ares", so I don't see where the problem is.

(7) Why is "tonne" (aka "metric ton") used instead of "megagram" ?

Why not?

[Travis B.]

Note that in the computing world, "micro" is commonly written with "u", by its graphic similarity to "μ", particularly in the case of "us" for microseconds.

[Emily]

i don't know that i'd agree that anything in the OP actually constitutes a flaw. the lowercase/uppercase doesn't seem like it would be an issue because the overlapping prefixes aren't likely to get confused: you're not taking medication by the megagram or measuring data by the millibyte. if the u.s. ever actually switched to metric i think i could get used to it for everything except temperature and dong sizes

[Richard W]

(7) Why is "tonne" (aka "metric ton") used instead of "megagram" ?

Possibly to avoid the confusion between mg and Mg.

[Darren]

Oh, I think in Australian English, "kilo" is sometimes used for "kilometer".

I have never heard this. Kilometres are shortened to "kay"s.

[KathTheDragon]

(3) Meters and liters are useful amounts to measure things on a typical human scale, but grams are not. Instead, one must use *kilo*grams. Imo, what we call a "kilogram" should've been called a "gram". This also prevents "kilogram" from having a short pithy word to refer to it, unless you use...

I think some of the smaller things in daily live, such as individual pieces of small consumer electronics, are closer in scale to grams than to kilograms. Anyway, a lot of food is sold in amounts smaller than a kilogram, so grams are practical measurements for it: The phrase "a 750 gram bread" is shorter than the phrase "a 750 milligram bread".

Typical cooking never uses amounts more than a kilo.

[Imralu]

Oh, I think in Australian English, "kilo" is sometimes used for "kilometer".

Definitely not. Kilos are only kilograms. Kilometers can be shortened to kays or, less formally, klicks. The only one I can think of that is ambiguous is /mɪlz/ for mm or ml.

Despite being Australian, I've always used imperial for anything length-related - miles, inches, feet, acres, mph, mpg; while volume, weight and temperature I use metric. All Australians use feet and inches for height, and most use them for rough distances and estimates and a few other purposes which should not be mentioned in polite company.

Are you a lot older than me? I'm 40 today.

I only use miles in fixed expressions of indeterminate length (e.g. "miles off", "missed by a mile") and would never say "2 miles" or "10 inches" or anything like that, except for penis size, but even there, cm is common too, especially as it's more precise (source: Grindr). The only time feet and inches with specific numbers before them really come up are here are when describing human height, but even there, I only really know what it means if it's between about 5'11" and 7'0". If someone tells me they're 5'5", I have no fucking idea what that means unless I convert it to centimetres. I just know it's not tall. TVs and computer monitors are given in inches, but a lot of people I know are not even aware that that's the diagonal measurement across the screen. It's just used as a label to compare the sizes, so you know which ones are bigger. I've never heard any Australian use mph, ever. Not even old people. Mpg sounds useful if that's the unit used in a catalogue or a car yard, but "mile" and "gallon" are almost meaningless to me. Most people I know will tell you how far (in kilometres) they can get on one tank — which, of course, is not about fuel efficiency, but more or less just how often you have to stop to refuel because tanks vary in size.

Weirdly, it's always acres when describing people's properties and hectares when describing how much forest is cleared. I don't really have a concept of either other than "like a big yard". (Now that I think about it, why isn't it "aker" in US English? Did they decide "-re" is OK in that word because they didn't want to have to use "k"?)

Where I work all the hardware is imperial cos all the quality stuff is American, so we still use it there too. And old people use imperial.

With hardware, I usually hear lengths in "mils" (mm) except for a few stock things like 2x4s (pronounced /ˌtuːbiˈfɔː/), but of course it depends on what the hardware is. A 2 inch pipe is not the same as a 50 mm pipe, so people will usually call it whichever one it is.

Also I've never met a human being who uses kW instead of horsepower.

Depends if you're talking about cars or electricity.

- Cms are too small and metres are too big

For what? It works just fine.

- Litres are a bit too big; having a drink-sized unit is useful

Lol, a litre is drink sized for me.

- Hectares are the devil's invention and have no place in god-fearing society

There's no god or devil, so all of that is moot. Square metres/kilometres all the way!

- There's nothing in the vicinity of a stone, which would be fairly useful

... kilos.

- Km just aren't as juicy as miles

I strongly disagree. Miles are meaningless and I only use the word for indeterminate lengths of a few kilometres.

- "litres per hundred kilometres" is just silly

Tells you what it is. Miles per gallon makes no sense to me and is only useful for comparing two vehicles if that's the unit you have in front of you.

[Raphael]

Ah, turns out I was talking out of my ass about kilos in Australia. Sorry.

[Darren]

Oh, I think in Australian English, "kilo" is sometimes used for "kilometer".

Definitely not. Kilos are only kilograms. Kilometers can be shortened to kays or, less formally, klicks. The only one I can think of that is ambiguous is /mɪlz/ for mm or ml.

Despite being Australian, I've always used imperial for anything length-related - miles, inches, feet, acres, mph, mpg; while volume, weight and temperature I use metric. All Australians use feet and inches for height, and most use them for rough distances and estimates and a few other purposes which should not be mentioned in polite company.

Are you a lot older than me? I'm 40 today.

I'm 19 today (was 19 yesterday as well).

I only use miles in fixed expressions of indeterminate length (e.g. "miles off", "missed by a mile") and would never say "2 miles" or "10 inches" or anything like that, except for penis size, but even there, cm is common too, especially as it's more precise (source: Grindr).

My usage of miles was greatly influenced by watching Top Gear. As for feet and inches, I just grew up using them, and never met anyone who seemed baffled by the concept, so I kept using them. I've heard other people who are equally as Australian as I am, if not more so, asking for a conversion from cms to feet and inches for height. Maybe that's just cause SA is more backwards than the East. Perhaps they're still using cubits in Tasmania.

Also I've never met a human being who uses kW instead of horsepower.

Depends if you're talking about cars or electricity.

I'm talking about cars.

- Cms are too small and metres are too big

For what? It works just fine.

Yeah, well it *works*, but we shouldn't settle for something that just *works*. Cms are too precise and metres too vague for normal everyday things (people, cars, furniture, small boats, windows, bookshelves, pianos, cows, etc.).

- Litres are a bit too big; having a drink-sized unit is useful

Lol, a litre is drink sized for me.

They generally don't sell beer by the litre in pubs (maybe I've just been going to the wrong pubs).

- There's nothing in the vicinity of a stone, which would be fairly useful

... kilos.

In the same way that a person 1 metre tall is in the vicinity of a person who is 6 metres tall. Or losing 1/6th of your small intestine is in the vicinity of losing all of your small intestine.

- Km just aren't as juicy as miles

I strongly disagree. Miles are meaningless and I only use the word for indeterminate lengths of a few kilometres.

Well I counter-disagree even more strongly. Kilometres are more meaningless, and I never use them when I can help it.

Miles per gallon makes no sense to me and is only useful for comparing two vehicles if that's the unit you have in front of you.

Well you could say the same about any unit of measurement.

[KathTheDragon]

Cms are too precise and metres too vague for normal everyday things (people, cars, furniture, small boats, windows, bookshelves, pianos, cows, etc.).

... What? Do you live in a world where you're only allowed to use integer amounts of a unit and you have to use the most precise measurement every time? What's wrong with '150cm' or '1.5m' (the height of my bookshelf, since you use that as an example)?

[xxx]

units of measurement are conventions based on physical constants...
but these constants are invisible and so impossible to use simply for a constant system...

so that in 3SDL, which tends towards a universal language (usable per se by everyone)
with a minimum of conventions (fixed in semantic primes),
I'm often reduced to using approximations that closely resemble non-metric measurements...

what measurement principle do you use in conlang...

[Raphael]

What's wrong with '150cm' or '1.5m' (the height of my bookshelf, since you use that as an example)?

I dunno about other places that use the metric system, but in colloquial German, the standard way to describe the height or length of things that are between one and two meters long/tall - such as most adult humans - would be to say "one" for the one meter, followed by the remaining number of centimeters. I. e. your bookshelf would be "one-fifty".

[Linguoboy]

Oh, I think in Australian English, "kilo" is sometimes used for "kilometer".

I have never heard this. Kilometres are shortened to "kay"s.

"klicks" in US military slang.

The real question, though, is where you stress the full form.

[KathTheDragon]

What's wrong with '150cm' or '1.5m' (the height of my bookshelf, since you use that as an example)?

I dunno about other places that use the metric system, but in colloquial German, the standard way to describe the height or length of things that are between one and two meters long/tall - such as most adult humans - would be to say "one" for the one meter, followed by the remaining number of centimeters. I. e. your bookshelf would be "one-fifty".

Same in English, which I'd parse as just giving the measurement in centimetres.

[Raphael]

The real question, though, is where you stress the full form.

Main stress on "me", with a secondary stress on "ki" for me. (When pronouncing words with four or more syllables, I find it very hard to avoid alternating stressed and unstressed syllables.) I might stress "lo" when using the word in spoken English, but I don't get to do that often.