• rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think it’s written ‘tonne’. And you should call it metric tonne if it’s not clear from the context.

    Wikipedia says:

    The tonne is a unit of mass equal to 1000 kilograms. It is a non-SI unit accepted for use with SI. It is also referred to as a metric ton to distinguish it from the non-metric units of the short ton (United States customary units) and the long ton (British imperial units). The official SI unit is the megagram (symbol: Mg), a less common way to express the same amount.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonne

    So yes, you can call it a megagramme and you’d be right. But we european people also sometimes do silly stuff and colloquially use wrong things. For example we also say it’s 20 degrees celsius outside. And that’s not the proper SI unit either. But that’s kinda another topic.

    • supercriticalcheese@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s typically shortened as t. So a mass of 1,000,000 kg will be referred as 1,000 t

      Normally it’s clear from the context and what units you are using so there is no ambiguity.

      • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not so sure. But maybe you’re right. I think I was confusing that with tonnage of a ship. But that’s a whole other concept and you can’t really confuse the two.

        With the 1000 t thats only because kg is a stupid SI unit and leads to the whole debacle. If there wasn’t a prefix in the unit name itself, I think people would have started to use the SI unit prefixes correctly at some point instead of inventing and omitting other names to compensate.

        I think I’ve heard things like megatonne. For example you can say your nuclear bomb has X megaton tnt equivalent.

        A mass of a million kg should be 1 gigagram or 1 kilotonne. Not 1000t.

        • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          But it literally is a kiloton? Mostly getting used for explosives if you talk about it, but it’s used:

          kiloton /ˈkɪlə(ʊ)tʌn/
          noun: kiloton; plural noun: kilotons; noun: kilotonne; plural noun: kilotonnes
          a unit of explosive power equivalent to 1,000 tons of TNT.

          The reason megagram isn’t used much is because it would be shortened to mg. Which is usually milligram. Sure, you could go the “Mg” route compared to “mg”, but that sucks. So “t” for ton works well. It’s just another name though, it doesn’t matter.

          • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I know. But you have the problem with the letter ‘m’ everytime. You just have to pay attention and write it correctly. And there is also ‘micro-’ in addition to the ‘milli’ and ‘mega’ you mentioned. However, most of the time it’s unlikely you’re off by a factor of 1 billion and won’t notice. Just do it right: 'µ, ‘m’, ‘M’.

            If you listen to my school teacher, you’re not supposed to use SI prefixes with other things. I think that’s not true but would apply to the ‘kiloton’. People wouldn’t like me talking about a ‘kilo-foot’ or ‘milli-yard’… I’ve had 3 deca-spoons of soup or there were 2.5 kilo-people at the concert. It took me 15 milli-days to finish the task.

          • supercriticalcheese@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think it’s mostly down to the fact the units could be mixed when written down.

            Mg and mg should not create confusion in theory the standard milion prefix in metric is a capital M.

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

          A mass of a million kg should be 1 gigagram or 1 kilotonne. Not 1000t. (Edit: And not a kilotonne either, rather a mega-kilogram.)

          The good thing: All of them are correct. The SI system actually does not care if you throw around extra zeros, so 1000t is fine. It is actually better to stay in the same SI prefix and just use larger numbers to make list entries easier comparable. Just imagine some ship shop would list it’s smaller offers in Mg and then switch to Gg for larger ships.

          • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Hmm, halfway…

            If you take the context away: When you learn that in school, it’s pointed out as a mistake if you write 10 000m. You should have converted that into 10km to get a perfect score.

            But there are certainly contexts where it makes sense to stay with one prefix. For example if you write things into a table. Or when your number is basis for a calculation that surely ends you up in the next bigger or smaller realm of numbers.

            I’m not sure if it’s necessarily the case for comparing stuff… It’s kind of rare that you have things that are a factor of 10000 or a million apart, so it’s kind of difficult for me to find examples. But I have capacitors that are 470uF or 22pF and resistors that are 220 Ohm or a Mega-Ohm or 150kOhm. They’re all wired into one circuit. I know how to handle that and switch between all of them. So people do switch and that’s kind of the point of having those prefixes. If I type things like that into my calculator, I use scientific notation and after the calculation I use the special key to find me the closest power of ten. I forgot the name of that key. ‘E’ or ‘ENG’. It makes it very easy, you just type in 470e-6 or 22e-9 and it figures it out for you, no matter how convoluted. You need to remember your powers of ten, but you already do that for at least half of them. I think most people know how many zeros are in a million or a thousand.

            On the other hand, if i say I’m dividing the road into sections of 100m, im not going to say I’m dividing 2km into 100m sections, but 2000m.

            The ‘offerings’ example is good. Because for example internet providers are all over the place. I’ve had a 16000 dsl line, 16Mbit is the same, and nowadays there is anything between 50 to 1000Mbit/s and some advertise it as 1000Mbit, some as a Gigabit line. But they want to sell stuff, not do maths correctly…

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

              If you take the context away: When you learn that in school, it’s pointed out as a mistake if you write 10 000m. You should have converted that into 10km to get a perfect score.

              Only if this was explicitly demanded. If the teacher doesn’t, and then claim 10000m is “wrong”, the teacher is wrong.

              • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think I had a strict maths teacher. But they told us upfront how to convert units and how to do the rounding. So there were no ambiguities.

                But I’ve also come to the conclusion that humans can handle numbers up to the ten or hundred thousands as well. We mostly do that instead of converting past kilo. And even textbooks say the sun is on average 150 million kilometers away.

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

          The official definition of a 1,000 kg is Mg but it’s not very frequently used in practice. Mostly because use of metric tonnes was already diffused

          Keep in mind that there is more than just SI units used in Europe in the past. For example if you read through an old thermodynamics textbook in Italian it is likely to use a lot calories and often the CGS system (centimeter grams second and calories).

          • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Sure. I’ve grown up with that stuff. And we also get our weather forecast in celsius each day… You don’t even have to open an old textbook for that.

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

      Wait, what’s the correct SI unit for 20 degrees Celsius then? I’ve never heard anything besides that.

      Edit: Nevermind, someone already asked the same question as me a bit further down. Disregard this question.

  • cecilkorik@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    No good reason, just historical inertia and resistance to change. People stick to what they’re familiar with, either the imperial system or to common metric units. Making a “metric ton” similar in size to an “imperial ton” arguably helped make it easier for some people to transition to metric.

    Megagram is a perfectly cromulent unit, just like “cromulent” is a perfectly cromulent word, but people still don’t use it very often. That’s just how language works. People use the words they prefer, and those words become common. Maybe if you start describing things in megagrams other people will also start doing it and it will become a common part of the language. Language is organic like that, there isn’t anyone making decisions on its behalf, although some people and organizations try.

    • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Similarly large volumes of water should be given in kl, Ml, Gl etc. instead of m^3. Which one is bigger 2500000 m^3 or 790000 m^3? Count the zeros if you want and then tell me if using appropriate prefixes would have made it easier to tell the difference.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you used scientific notation or commas (or periods, depending on region) to format those numbers for human consumption, that would also make it easier.

  • marcos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m all for megagram. If nothing, it will stop the senseless people that insists on using imperial unities from confusing everybody.

  • Harpsist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Apparently megagram is the correct term! Someone else was just posting about another metric question and they posted some historical reasons for why megagram never took off.

    That car weighs in at 6 megagrams.

    Yes.

  • SkinnyTimmy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Also, same issue as with MB and mb, you might confuse megagram with milligram

    Although that’s not really the reason, more like an argument to keep it this way

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

      And you might confuse MB, megabytes, with MiB, mebibytes. MB is typically used to measure storage, and MiB typically used to measure data. There’s 1000 bytes in a kilobyte, and 1024 bytes in a kibibyte.

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

        I still use mb and kb as 1024 instead of 1000, because I prefer to not have units switched around from under me. 2^16 will always address 64kb, not 65.

        • Synthead@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          KB is measured in powers of 10, where KiB is measured in powers of 2:

          However, this error is so common that most folks will know what you mean. It’ll only really get you in trouble when you’re accurately comparing sizes of storage and data. There’s a good chance it won’t really matter unless you’re working with code or archiving disks.

          This is also why a “2 TB” hard drive is “smaller than 2 TB.” 2 terabytes is 1.819 tebibytes. Even Windows will incorrectly call TiB units TB and terabyte, so people have often carried a conspiracy theory that drive manufacturers “short you,” or that the missing data somehow has to do with enormous file system metadata.

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

            There are actually two standards here. Kibibytes was introduced later as a way to reduce confusion cause by the uninitiated thinking the JEDEC standard refered to powers of ten instead of two. That’s why I’m saying that 64 kilobytes is equal to 2^16 bytes, because that’s what the original standard was.

      • ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Mega is a million. Kilo is a thousand. 1024 in kilobytes comes from powers of 2 which are more natural in addressing computer memory

  • argenfarg@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I brought a shit ton of tacos. Or I have supplied us with a faecal megagram of tacos. You be the judge.

    • bugsmith@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am shocked by how well your latter example emphasizes an extremely large quantity of tacos.

      I vote for that one.

  • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Two relevant details:

    • The OG metric system (from the XVIII century) had no prefix for 10⁶. “Mega-” would be only formally acknowledged by the SI in 1960.
    • The ton units (yup, plural) backtrack all the way to a volume unit from the Middle Ages, the amount of liquid that you’d be able to put in a big arse cask*

    Based on those two things, I think that the ton was standardised to 10⁶g considerably before the name “megagram” had the chance to appear, to the point that it became the default name across languages.

    *I don’t know the English name for the cask, but in Portuguese it’s “tonel”. From that “tonelada” (the unit). It used to be 800kg before the metric system though.

          • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m from Brazil but I think that the units were the same anyway. The ones that I recall are (note: approximated values)

            • tonelada (ton) - 800kg
            • arroba - 15kg. Nowadays the word mostly refers to the “@” sign, that used to be the unit’s symbol
            • arrátel (pound) - 450g
            • onça (ounce) - 30g
            • milha (mile) - 1.8km
            • vara (rod) - 1.1m
            • pé (foot) - 33cm
            • polegada (inch) - 2.5cm

            I don’t recall the volume units, but I don’t expect them to be too different from the anglo units.

              • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yup - at least in Europe this backtracks all the way into the Middle Ages. And it was actually a big deal because the units were similar, neither completely identical nor completely different. And that was actually a big deal because people could argue which of those units they meant, specially when buying/selling stuff. (For example, let’s say that some Portuguese merchant agrees to sell “five tons of fish” to a random Englishman. Now you get:

                • the merchant arguing “five Portuguese tons”, expecting to sell 793*5=3965kg of fish
                • the buyer arguing “five English tons”, expecting to buy 1088*5=5440kg of fish

                even if both were in good faith they’d feel themselves cheated on the deal.

                To make it worse sometimes the units changed inside the same realm, over time.

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

                Oh, you are in for a surprise.

                Just look at the imperial area measurement unities. Very few countries standardized them, and even on those, people don’t really use the standard.

  • Kalash@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The official unit name is megagram. Ton is just used much more commonly.

  • etuomaala@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you think about it, tonne is actually a better base unit than grams, because it aligns better with the cubic metre (1m^3 = (approx.) 1 tonne of water.)

    So really, I would ask why kilograms and milligrams, and not millitonnes and microtonnes?

    I can picture it now. I weigh 70 millitonnes.