1713: "50 ccs"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
thunk
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:29 am UTC
Location: Arguably Exiled

1713: "50 ccs"

Postby thunk » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:16 am UTC

Image

Alt-text: There's been a raccoon accident at an accordion bacchanalia! Double doses!

cchirp everything, now Randall's ccrafting accidental wordplay?
Free markets, free movement, free plops
Blitz on, my friends Quantized, GnomeAnne, and iskinner!
troo dat

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:26 am UTC

Can I congratulate Randall on his apostrophic restraint. I always thought that even if written in all-caps, signs and notices could stoop to a lower-case plural-s as an extra member of the character-set rather than an apostrophe to 'disambiguate' an initialism's final plurality.

Also, this is two Fridays in a row that release has been so early, I think.

User avatar
thunk
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:29 am UTC
Location: Arguably Exiled

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby thunk » Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:44 am UTC

Not really, Soupspoon. The comic was released at 00:53 America/New_York time, in line with the other comics this week, but somewhat later than the usual 1 minute after midnight.
Free markets, free movement, free plops
Blitz on, my friends Quantized, GnomeAnne, and iskinner!
troo dat

Misel
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:30 am UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Misel » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:32 am UTC

Hello,

new guy here. Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious but I think I'm missing at least part of the joke.

Wouldn't she need 100 "CC" to write "HICCUP VACCINE" 50 times? :oops:

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:47 am UTC

thunk wrote:Not really, Soupspoon. The comic was released at 00:53 America/New_York time, in line with the other comics this week, but somewhat later than the usual 1 minute after midnight.

I can't speak for all instances, but (from here in the UK) I'm sure I've been left many due mornings with no new comic, only seeing them in the afternoon.

Brief but boring analysis:
Spoiler:
Cross-comparing the thread start-times and DgbrtBOT's page-creations on explainxkcd (presumably GMT), six of the last 14 comics (three out of five Fridays) were 'as early as expected' (with threads starting here from one to 25 minutes after the BOT found the comic, indicating humans camping on xkcd.com in anticipation).

The remaining eight were all post-midday (British Summer Time, GMT+1) and also show greater delays in humans noticing, after the autowikipages, of up to 67 and no less than 15 minutes after. Assumining dgbrt's thing hadn't needed nudging (that it was never beaten by local humans somewhat counterindicates such a possibility), I think I can assume that it is a good indicator of comic publication time, perhaps within a minute or three, and a drop-off of page-refreshers amongst members of this forum who are likely to compose the initial posts here.


But it was just a side observation. As per What-Ifs, they come when they come, and I'm Ok with that. Reasonably so, at least. :P

solune
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2011 12:58 pm UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby solune » Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:05 am UTC

I, a European troll, came all the way from 1983 to say: "what's up with CCs anyway ? Are millilitres too good for you ?"

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:17 am UTC

solune wrote:I, a European troll, came all the way from 1983 to say: "what's up with CCs anyway ? Are millilitres too good for you ?"

Strictly, I think cm3 is an SI unit, whereas the the litre (and by extension the ml) is only tolerated. On the other hand, cc is not an accepted way of writing cm3.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:21 am UTC

Well, there's the issue with cubic centimetres and centimetres cubed, and what each of them actually mean...

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:00 am UTC

Soupspoon wrote:Well, there's the issue with cubic centimetres and centimetres cubed, and what each of them actually mean...

The only guidance I've found on that is that "the prefix is part of the unit", which implies that "cm" is an atomic symbol: when you cube it you cube the whole thing. So it's (centimetres) cubed, not centi-(metres cubed). "Cubic centimetre" is unambiguous, I think, because of the word order.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:27 am UTC

Actually, I was thinking more of "10 centimetres cubed" not being "10 cubic centimetres" but "1 decimetre cubed"/"1 cubic decimetre" or 1000 cm³, but "cm³" readily reads as "centimetres cubed", confusingly.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:35 am UTC

Soupspoon wrote:Actually, I was thinking more of "10 centimetres cubed" not being "10 cubic centimetres" but "1 decimetre cubed"/"1 cubic decimetre" or 1000 cm³, but "cm³" readily reads as "centimetres cubed", confusingly.

Ah, yes, I agree there. The written form is fine but the English pronunciation is on the wrong side of ambiguous. No doubt purists would say that there's no plural 's', and it should be read "ten centimetre cubed", but that gets a big fat linguist's asterisk from me.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5579
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:53 am UTC

I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4889
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby HES » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:53 am UTC

orthogon wrote:No doubt purists would say that there's no plural 's', and it should be read "ten centimetre cubed", but that gets a big fat linguist's asterisk from me.

"Ten centimetre cubeds", surely?
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:05 am UTC

Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.

Suppose the procedure urgently requires a small and precise quantity of ground-up corn chips. The hospital pharmacy can't help, but then the surgeon remembers spotting Messrs Godley and Creme, who were visiting a sick friend on one of the wards and had brought a few packs with them.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5579
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1713: "10cc"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:08 am UTC

orthogon wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.

Suppose the procedure urgently requires a small and precise quantity of ground-up corn chips. The hospital pharmacy can't help, but then the surgeon remembers spotting Messrs Godley and Creme, who were visiting a sick friend on one of the wards and had brought a few packs with them.

Lol!
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby CharlieP » Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:16 am UTC

Misel wrote:Hello,

new guy here. Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious but I think I'm missing at least part of the joke.

Wouldn't she need 100 "CC" to write "HICCUP VACCINE" 50 times? :oops:


We don't know how many CCs she already has. :)
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Flumble » Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:53 am UTC

Misel wrote:Hello,

new guy here. Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious but I think I'm missing at least part of the joke.

Wouldn't she need 100 "CC" to write "HICCUP VACCINE" 50 times? :oops:

Did it read 'I need to write "hiccup vaccine" 50 times!' (emphasis mine) before or did you misread the comic?

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4889
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby HES » Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:55 am UTC

Misel wrote:Wouldn't she need 100 "CC" to write "HICCUP VACCINE" 50 times? :oops:

Sure, but the comic says 25 times. So either Randall messed up then corrected it (this is not unheard of), or you've misread something.

Ninjad
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2053
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:05 pm UTC

There's a contract in the hospital which limits the number of CCs a nurse is allowed to use.

Fortunately, a special clause was added for emergency situations such as this. It's known as the....


CC-rider :P


I'll let someone else jump in with the jokes about c-lang compilers. :oops:
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby pogrmman » Fri Jul 29, 2016 3:00 pm UTC

Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image


Are those chips some sort of cheap knock off of Doritos?

DavidSh
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 6:09 pm UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby DavidSh » Fri Jul 29, 2016 3:53 pm UTC

I was figuring carbon copies.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5438
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:28 pm UTC

Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image

Those are tortilla chips.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

Justin Lardinois
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 4:47 pm UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Justin Lardinois » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:26 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image

Those are tortilla chips.


Which are almost always made from corn. There are flour tortilla chips, and I'm not familiar with the brand in the photo, but they look like the corn variety.

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby pogrmman » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:31 pm UTC

Justin Lardinois wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image

Those are tortilla chips.


Which are almost always made from corn. There are flour tortilla chips, and I'm not familiar with the brand in the photo, but they look like the corn variety.



I'm not familiar with the brand either, but they are almost certainly corn. Flour tortilla chips (and plain tortillas) suck.

Justin Lardinois
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 4:47 pm UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Justin Lardinois » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:37 pm UTC

pogrmman wrote:
Justin Lardinois wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image

Those are tortilla chips.


Which are almost always made from corn. There are flour tortilla chips, and I'm not familiar with the brand in the photo, but they look like the corn variety.



I'm not familiar with the brand either, but they are almost certainly corn. Flour tortilla chips (and plain tortillas) suck.


I should also add that calling these "tortilla chips" seems wrong to me, since they're powder coated like Doritos. Then again, I've heard that Europe's idea of nachos always involves Doritos.

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby pogrmman » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:51 pm UTC

Justin Lardinois wrote:
pogrmman wrote:
Justin Lardinois wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:
Eternal Density wrote:I was briefly confused because I expected a joke about corn chips.
Image

Those are tortilla chips.


Which are almost always made from corn. There are flour tortilla chips, and I'm not familiar with the brand in the photo, but they look like the corn variety.



I'm not familiar with the brand either, but they are almost certainly corn. Flour tortilla chips (and plain tortillas) suck.


I should also add that calling these "tortilla chips" seems wrong to me, since they're powder coated like Doritos. Then again, I've heard that Europe's idea of nachos always involves Doritos.


I agree with that. Proper tortilla chips are supposed to be just plain. Although, there is a brand called Julio's that is coated with salt and spices and is very good...

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5438
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:20 pm UTC

Tortilla chips are made from corn tortillas, of course, and being flavored or not doesn't make them not tortilla chips; a package of e.g. Cool Ranch Doritos still says "tortilla chips" at the end of its full name on the package ("Doritos® Brand Cool Ranch™ Flavored Tortilla Chips"). I don't think I've ever seen chips made from flour tortillas (though do like flour tortillas themselves better than corn tortillas, I can't imaging them making a very good chip).

My objection to calling those "corn chips" is that corn chips are not Dorito-like chips, they're Frito-like chips, like these:

Image
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

commodorejohn
Posts: 1180
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby commodorejohn » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:15 pm UTC

Justin Lardinois wrote:Then again, I've heard that Europe's idea of nachos always involves Doritos.

...say what.

I like nachos, and I like Doritos. But this just makes me sad.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 753
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby somitomi » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:51 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:
Soupspoon wrote:Actually, I was thinking more of "10 centimetres cubed" not being "10 cubic centimetres" but "1 decimetre cubed"/"1 cubic decimetre" or 1000 cm³, but "cm³" readily reads as "centimetres cubed", confusingly.

Ah, yes, I agree there. The written form is fine but the English pronunciation is on the wrong side of ambiguous. No doubt purists would say that there's no plural 's', and it should be read "ten centimetre cubed", but that gets a big fat linguist's asterisk from me.

"10 centimetre cubed" sounds to me like you're talking about a cube with 10 centimetre sides, which of course is not 10 cubic centimetres.
Avatar from Freddino
Image
―◯‐◯ FG Discord◯‐◯―

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5579
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:58 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Tortilla chips are made from corn tortillas, of course, and being flavored or not doesn't make them not tortilla chips; a package of e.g. Cool Ranch Doritos still says "tortilla chips" at the end of its full name on the package ("Doritos® Brand Cool Ranch™ Flavored Tortilla Chips"). I don't think I've ever seen chips made from flour tortillas (though do like flour tortillas themselves better than corn tortillas, I can't imaging them making a very good chip).

My objection to calling those "corn chips" is that corn chips are not Dorito-like chips, they're Frito-like chips, like these:
Spoiler:
Image

I've never seen anything like those before. I guess no one I know has served Fritos.

Also, today I learned that corn tortillas are made into other things. I wasn't really familiar with the term 'tortilla chips', just 'corn chips' or 'nacho chips'.
I think what Australia calls corn chips are actually tortilla chips. Either way they're mostly corn. :P

CC's are an 'Australian Made' version of Doritos, but probably not cheaper. If you want a cheap knockoff:
Image

Yeah, still (incorrectly, according to wikipedia) called corn chips.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby pogrmman » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:45 pm UTC

Actual corn chips are delicious. Much better than tortilla chips IMO. Tortilla chips can be very good though. I've only had flour tortilla chips one place, and they suck. Stay away from them.

dtilque
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:53 am UTC
Location: Nogero

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby dtilque » Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:39 pm UTC

Let me get this straight: we take some corn chips, crumble them up into very small pieces, put them into 50 small cube-shaped containers each 1 centimeter on a side, and presto! we have a hiccup vaccine. Right?
“This world is a strange madhouse. Currently, every coachman and every waiter is debating whether relativity theory is correct. Belief in this matter depends on political party affiliation.”
-- Albert Einstein, 12 September 1920

User avatar
JohnTheWysard
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:38 am UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby JohnTheWysard » Sat Jul 30, 2016 1:10 am UTC

thunk wrote:Alt-text: There's been a raccoon accident at an accordion bacchanalia! Double doses!


I just hope the accident wasn't at the raccoon's sleeping quarters at the zoo. The raccoonnookkeeper would be really upset.

User avatar
colonel_hack
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 5:50 am UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby colonel_hack » Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:29 pm UTC

solune wrote:I, a European troll, came all the way from 1983 to say: "what's up with CCs anyway ? Are millilitres too good for you ?"

What about things like millicentigrams? Or mg/100ml? Shirley! The ms beg to be cancelled.

wikipedia used to list vitamin K content in micrograms. It's source used millicentigrams /but/ the source's source used micrograms on the same numeric values. (May it still does. Didn't check.)
Last edited by colonel_hack on Fri Nov 24, 2017 7:30 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 753
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby somitomi » Sat Jul 30, 2016 10:22 pm UTC

colonel_hack wrote:
solune wrote:I, a European troll, came all the way from 1983 to say: "what's up with CCs anyway ? Are millilitres too good for you ?"

What about things like millicentigrams? Or mg/100ml? Shirley, the ms beg to be cancelled.

wikipedia used to list vitamin K content in micrograms. It's source used millicentigrams /but/ the source's source used micrograms on the same numeric values. (May it still does. Didn't check.)

Well, since it's just a 10-3 multiplier, you can actually do that, saying "grams per litre" is much easier anyway. What seems confusing at first is how 1 g/cm3 is equal to 1000 kg/m3. the prefixes just don't match up nicely thanks to the pesky "cubed".
I wouldn't use "millicentigram", because (1) it's longer than "microgram" and (2) prefixes shouldn't be used in combination according to the SI anyway.
Avatar from Freddino
Image
―◯‐◯ FG Discord◯‐◯―

User avatar
Reecer6
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:59 am UTC

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Reecer6 » Sun Jul 31, 2016 6:23 am UTC

Ponytail, I think it would be much more useful to email this request to the nurse, so you can keep file of it for posterity. Then you can CC your ccs to your co-workers currently deployed to the Cocos island, under their .cc domain email addresses.

Or, perhaps, you could record yourself saying it and post it on Youtube, while making sure to add your transcription to the CC. Just make sure to note that it's under a CC license.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby orthogon » Mon Aug 01, 2016 9:10 am UTC

somitomi wrote:
colonel_hack wrote:
solune wrote:I, a European troll, came all the way from 1983 to say: "what's up with CCs anyway ? Are millilitres too good for you ?"

What about things like millicentigrams? Or mg/100ml? Shirley, the ms beg to be cancelled.

wikipedia used to list vitamin K content in micrograms. It's source used millicentigrams /but/ the source's source used micrograms on the same numeric values. (May it still does. Didn't check.)

Well, since it's just a 10-3 multiplier, you can actually do that, saying "grams per litre" is much easier anyway. What seems confusing at first is how 1 g/cm3 is equal to 1000 kg/m3. the prefixes just don't match up nicely thanks to the pesky "cubed".
I wouldn't use "millicentigram", because (1) it's longer than "microgram" and (2) prefixes shouldn't be used in combination according to the SI anyway.


I presume y'all posters are riffing on the abbreviation "mcg" which is used to denote micrograms (μg), particularly in a medical context. Although it could appear to denote millicentigrams (resulting in ten times the intended dose), as solune points out the SI forbids compounding of prefixes, and in practice nobody uses centigrams anyway, so millicentigrams are even more unlikely. In medicine, mg and μg are by far the most widely used units of mass. In South America you can buy 1g tablets of paracetamol, but it's described as "1000mg". The importance of distinguishing between mg and μg is presumably crucial.

Presumably "mcg" developed because it could be typed on a Roman-alphabet typewriter, and/or in handwritten form was easier to tell apart from "mg" - doctors' handwriting being notoriously poor. In retrospect using a Greek letter for just one of the SI prefixes was arguably a mistake; "μ" is just the Greek version of "m" after all.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
svenman
Posts: 659
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:09 pm UTC
Location: 680 km NNE of the Château d'If

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby svenman » Mon Aug 01, 2016 9:36 am UTC

I have occasionally seen "ug" as a stand-in for µg, but never "mcg". I'm based in Germany, though, and not in a medical profession, either of which may play a part in this.
Apart from Forum Games, mostly active on the One True Thread.
If you need help understanding what's going on there, the xkcd Time Wiki may be useful.

Addams thanks all of us who helped. Her life is much better now.

Randallspeed to all blitzers on the One True Thread!

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Aug 01, 2016 10:09 am UTC

orthogon wrote:In retrospect using a Greek letter for just one of the SI prefixes was arguably a mistake; "μ" is just the Greek version of "m" after all.
Conversley, given the accepted use of both "milli-" and "micro-" (and, for that matter, "mega-", which claims the uppercase), one of them had to be given something other than the 'natural' choice of "m".

(Let's see, what else could have been done, in preparation for the 1960s-ish adoption of micro? Well, the Latin equivalent to greek "mikros" is perhaps some form or other of "parvus" (poor), "brevis" (terse), "exilis" (inconsequential), perhaps, although that's just what immediately comes up in a search (and doesn't just mean that one word I parenthesised, that's just hastily representative). Using 'p' would mean rejecting "pico" (leaving it to printing, but demand its own replacement in SI) but but 'b' should work, unless confusable in bad script with d for deci, and 'e' could work (we already have E for exa-, all those capitals on above kilo- multipliers) except for perhaps natural logarithm confusion. But maybe some of the choices clash with units that I haven't so far recollected...)

It is confusing. If milli- hadn't already been set in stone, I think it could have been better to have had M for mega- and m for micro- (10±6) would have been usefully symmetric, have Peta- and pico- similarly alligned, perhaps even redo the whole system for <Foo>ta-/<foo>to- symmetry across the whole range of positive and negative powers (and <Foo>bi-, if not ...ba-, for those binary power near-equivalents, later on). But think of the unlearning/relearning needed!

((Yes, I was going to point out 'u' as well. Mostly used by me, back in the day, with the "micro Emacs" editor, "ue.exe" on DOS machines. That's my personal go-to mnemonic for which way round milli- and micro- are notated, if I ever get confused. That and "milli-" obviously being a thousand(th), by literal translation. Not that it helps Vi-users... :) ))

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1713: "50 ccs"

Postby orthogon » Mon Aug 01, 2016 12:21 pm UTC

True, u is a pretty good stand-in for μ. And a good point about Mega. That's another annoyance: that 'k' is lowercase, breaking the rule that the "big" (multiplier >1) prefixes are all capitals.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Keyman and 105 guests