"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
|
| Uh, what relationship between liter and kilogram? You are thinking of
| earlier versions of the metric system; SI defines no such relationship.

Not now, of course, because no such relationship exists. But earlier a
relationship was presumed to exist, and belief in that relationship is still
perpetuated among lay users of the system, even though it's wrong and
misleading. Whether you measure volume by the liter or the hogshead is
irrelevant as long as all the units are well defined.

I'm reminded of a (probably apocryphal) story about MIT engineering students
who were asked to design and construct a bridge using the unit of "smoot",
Professor Smoot being their instructor. His linear, volumetric, and mass
properties were the measurement units for the project. Steel had a density
of so many smoots-mass per smoots-volume, for example. In doing that, you
would gain a deeper appreciation for where these "accepted" values for
everything actually come from, and greater insight into the arbitrary nature
of practically any measurement system.

An American baker is happy baking cookies in Fahrenheit. A French baker is
happy baking cookies in Celsius. Does it really matter? My argument is
that it does not, and that any measurement system that claims to be based on
"natural" relationships is probably not.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org