I created a unit of length equal to 3 meters, a unit of volume equal to that of a sphere 3 meters in diameter, and a unit of area equal to the surface area of that sphere, and I want a handy name to call them.
Frex, for length, we use meters. For volume we use kiloliters (which are cubic meters). For area we use the rather unimaginative square meters, but we COULD use centiares. (You've probably heard of a hectare, which is 100 ares. A centiare is 1/100th of an are, or 1 square meter.)
So I'd like less lame-sounding names than unit, square unit, and cubic unit.
---
A bit of optional backstory, and what we have to gain from this:
For quite some time I've had a hobby of thinking about how to simplify the ship design sequence. Part of that involves getting rid of the dual volume measurement system of kl and Dtons and simply designing things in terms of one unit. I've also pondered a useful replacement for the displacement ton ever since the whole 13.5/14 kl snafu. And when I discovered decibels and how awesome they were, well, they simplify a lot of things like figuring out in your head the base stats of any hull from by knowing only a single two-digit number, so I had to make use of them.
One of the most annoying things about ships is having to use pi and a conversion factor to convert the length of a ship to its surface area or volume. Wouldn't it be nice if we could do away with all that? If all we had to do to figure out the area or volume was to simply square or cube the length of the ship? Well, it can be done, and if you stop caring about kl and Dtons, it becomes VERY easy.
All that needs to happen is to define 3 new units of measure, just like they did when they invented the Metric system. Now, traditional thinking might lead us to think that squaring and cubing our new unit would produce a square or a cube, but it doesn't have to if we include in our definition of the square and cubic the fact that we want the area and volume of a sphere. If you find this strange, I suggest looking up "circular mil". (Afterward, keep in mind we're not working with circles, we're working with spheres.)
The new unit, being a measure of length, could be converted to any other unit of length, such as the meter. The meter was originally defined as being 1/10-millionth the distance between the north pole and the equator, but you can convert them to inches by multiplying them by 0.254. Likewise, you can convert our new unit into meters by multiplying by something, but by what?
I chose 3 meters for three reasons. First, one "story" of a building, or the height of a deck, is generally taken to be 3 meters. Second, such a sphere is just a little over the volume of a metric ton of liquid hydrogen; in fact it's closer to the correct value than 14 is. Both of these reasons make it very easy to visualize. The third reason is a mathematical convenience, but explaining it would be a major digression.
The advantage of this system is that all you have to do to find an area or volume is square or cube the length, which you can often do in your head. No onerous formulas, no pi, no nonsense at all. You CAN of course convert these values into ca or kl if you need by multiplying by the conversion factors, which are 9pi and 4.5pi, respectively, but once you're comfortable using these units, you won't feel the need. Those of us not born to the metric system will recognize the feeling, but in this case, the process is much quicker.
Frex, for length, we use meters. For volume we use kiloliters (which are cubic meters). For area we use the rather unimaginative square meters, but we COULD use centiares. (You've probably heard of a hectare, which is 100 ares. A centiare is 1/100th of an are, or 1 square meter.)
So I'd like less lame-sounding names than unit, square unit, and cubic unit.
---
A bit of optional backstory, and what we have to gain from this:
For quite some time I've had a hobby of thinking about how to simplify the ship design sequence. Part of that involves getting rid of the dual volume measurement system of kl and Dtons and simply designing things in terms of one unit. I've also pondered a useful replacement for the displacement ton ever since the whole 13.5/14 kl snafu. And when I discovered decibels and how awesome they were, well, they simplify a lot of things like figuring out in your head the base stats of any hull from by knowing only a single two-digit number, so I had to make use of them.
One of the most annoying things about ships is having to use pi and a conversion factor to convert the length of a ship to its surface area or volume. Wouldn't it be nice if we could do away with all that? If all we had to do to figure out the area or volume was to simply square or cube the length of the ship? Well, it can be done, and if you stop caring about kl and Dtons, it becomes VERY easy.
All that needs to happen is to define 3 new units of measure, just like they did when they invented the Metric system. Now, traditional thinking might lead us to think that squaring and cubing our new unit would produce a square or a cube, but it doesn't have to if we include in our definition of the square and cubic the fact that we want the area and volume of a sphere. If you find this strange, I suggest looking up "circular mil". (Afterward, keep in mind we're not working with circles, we're working with spheres.)
The new unit, being a measure of length, could be converted to any other unit of length, such as the meter. The meter was originally defined as being 1/10-millionth the distance between the north pole and the equator, but you can convert them to inches by multiplying them by 0.254. Likewise, you can convert our new unit into meters by multiplying by something, but by what?
I chose 3 meters for three reasons. First, one "story" of a building, or the height of a deck, is generally taken to be 3 meters. Second, such a sphere is just a little over the volume of a metric ton of liquid hydrogen; in fact it's closer to the correct value than 14 is. Both of these reasons make it very easy to visualize. The third reason is a mathematical convenience, but explaining it would be a major digression.
The advantage of this system is that all you have to do to find an area or volume is square or cube the length, which you can often do in your head. No onerous formulas, no pi, no nonsense at all. You CAN of course convert these values into ca or kl if you need by multiplying by the conversion factors, which are 9pi and 4.5pi, respectively, but once you're comfortable using these units, you won't feel the need. Those of us not born to the metric system will recognize the feeling, but in this case, the process is much quicker.
