For the linguistic pedants!

[Edwin_m]

Scientific pedantry: I saw a paper recently saying something like a volcano at 1000 degrees C was ten times as hot as boiling water.  This is meaningless - temperatures can only be compared in this way if measured from absolute zero. 

[TheQ]

Scientific pedantry: I saw a paper recently saying something like a volcano at 1000 degrees C was ten times as hot as boiling water.  This is meaningless - temperatures can only be compared in this way if measured from absolute zero. 

And the boiling point of water is dependent on it's pressure.

[bluebottle]

And the boiling point of water is dependent on it's pressure.

 

“And the boiling point of water is dependent on it's pressure” ?

 

Science: Good.

Punctuation: Must try harder.

 

Edit: My typing: Poor!

[Ozexpatriate]

i have to admit being peeved at the trend in US automobile advertising to describe a car as having "more MPGs" which is spoken in advertising as "more em pee gees".  
 
It's illiterate and an inaccurate description of higher gas efficiency. At least (being 'more') we don't have the less/fewer issue.
 
Perhaps more ridiculous is the MGPe used to rate electric vehicles, even though it does have some rational basis, being derived from equating 121.32 MJ with the energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.

[Pacific231G]

i have to admit being peeved at the trend in US automobile advertising to describe a car as having "more MPGs" which is spoken in advertising as "more em pee gees".  

 

It's illiterate and an inaccurate description of higher gas efficiency. At least (being 'more') we don't have the less/fewer issue.

 

Perhaps more ridiculous is the MGPe used to rate electric vehicles, even though it does have some rational basis, being derived from equating 121.32 MJ with the energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.

Is it more ridiculous than measuring power outputs in terms of horses? In France (and I think Italy an Germany) they have an odd creature known as a steam horse (Cheval Vapeur Ch) which sits under the bonnet of your car and is slightly less powerful than one of James Watt's rather optimistic 745 watt Imperial horses? A Cheval Vapeur must not of course be confused with a fiscal horse (CV)

[Ozexpatriate]

Is it more ridiculous than measuring power outputs in terms of horses or in France (and I think Italy an Germany) an odd creature known as a steam horse (Cheval Vapeur CV) which is slightly less powerful than one of James Watt's rather optimistic 745 Watt Imperial horses.

Absolutely not. "Horse power" is an absurd unit in any construct, though the attempt to use something familiar as the reference is common to MPGe.

 

I'm all for measuring power in Watts.

[Edwin_m]

I'm all for measuring power in Watts.

Sorry, but where a SI unit is named after an individual the abbreviation is captialised but the word in full isn't.  So that should be "watts" - unless of course your measurements are taking place in a certain district of Los Angeles.  Lots of people get that wrong including Roger Ford. 

[keefer]

You know, one of the most annoying things for me, you know, is the number of sporting identities being interviewed by television reporters, you know, who say "you know" a number of times in one sentence, you know? If the reporter knew the answer, you know, the question would not have been asked in the first place. You know what I mean, mate? This is usually seen in the, you know, post match/game interviews, you know, but also occurs during organised, you know, press conferences. Who else, you know, finds this irritating? 

 

Dave  

or in the case of TV persons, especially of the younger persuasion, 'actually' and/or 'literally'

like, if, you know, you actually took those words out, the sentence literally means the same thing.

 

actually

[Ozexpatriate]

Sorry, but where a SI unit is named after an individual the abbreviation is captialised but the word in full isn't.  So that should be "watts" - unless of course your measurements are taking place in a certain district of Los Angeles.

Fair enough, but when the symbol for the SI unit is based on a unit named for someone it is capitalized as in kW, not kw.

 

And that leads me to people who capitalize "k" when they mean a multiplier of 1,000, like $3K as short-hand for $3,000.00. While it's a hodgepodge, if used at all, at best it should be $3k. Million is confusing. I like to stick with "M" for consistency. When I see $3m it clearly doesn't mean milli, ($0.003) but I will accept that there is no 'standard'.

 

While on the subject of kilo, it's keel-o-metres people. Not kill-om-eters. (I have no preference for metre/meter spelling. Both are acceptable.) It's not pronounced the same way as odometer and speedometer, even if the unit kilometre is on the same instrument. (We don't use kill-og-rams for mass.)

[96701]

(We don't use kill-og-rams for mass.)

We do if we're from North East Lancashire.

[BR60103]

And that leads me to people who capitalize "k" when they mean a multiplier of 1,000, like $3K as short-hand for $3,000.00. While it's a hodgepodge, if used at all, at best it should be $3k. Million is confusing. I like to stick with "M" for consistency. When I see $3m it clearly doesn't mean milli, ($0.003) but I will accept that there is no 'standard'.

Had a colleague in computers who noticed the $40K salary ads and wondered if he could get $40960 since a Kilobyte was actually 1024 of them.

 

When I see 3M, I first think 3,000, going back to the spec for M board feet.