Possessive for abbreviation of a regular plural noun
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
How do you write the possessive for an abbreviation of a regular plural noun, when the plural 's' is not present in the abbreviation?
I want to write "ten kilograms' weight" in a scientific context where the abbreviation kg is used for the plural word kilograms.
How do I write this? Is it "10 kg's weight", or "10 kg' weight", or something else?
Thanks!
grammatical-number abbreviations measuring-units tech-writing
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
How do you write the possessive for an abbreviation of a regular plural noun, when the plural 's' is not present in the abbreviation?
I want to write "ten kilograms' weight" in a scientific context where the abbreviation kg is used for the plural word kilograms.
How do I write this? Is it "10 kg's weight", or "10 kg' weight", or something else?
Thanks!
grammatical-number abbreviations measuring-units tech-writing
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
2
If you're doing it in a scientific context, it should just be 10 kg. No "weight", no "s".
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 2:35
1
By "ten kilograms' weight" I specifically mean the weight (as measured in newtons) possessed by a mass of ten kilograms. The term "kilogram-force" does exist to describe this, for which there is an abbreviation "kgf"; but I think that kgf is an actual unit that assumes a very specific value for the gravitational field strength. I just want to communicate "the weight of 10 kg of mass".
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 2:55
You only need to use the unit ("kg") in all contexts. For any disambiguation or for improving clarity, the sentence may need to rephrased, which is a different issue. HTH.
– Kris
Nov 19 at 8:05
I think "a/the weight of 10 kg" would be fine. Your audience will understand the difference between mass and weight, so I don't think there's any need to use the awkward "the weight of a 10 kg mass."
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 13:43
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
How do you write the possessive for an abbreviation of a regular plural noun, when the plural 's' is not present in the abbreviation?
I want to write "ten kilograms' weight" in a scientific context where the abbreviation kg is used for the plural word kilograms.
How do I write this? Is it "10 kg's weight", or "10 kg' weight", or something else?
Thanks!
grammatical-number abbreviations measuring-units tech-writing
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
How do you write the possessive for an abbreviation of a regular plural noun, when the plural 's' is not present in the abbreviation?
I want to write "ten kilograms' weight" in a scientific context where the abbreviation kg is used for the plural word kilograms.
How do I write this? Is it "10 kg's weight", or "10 kg' weight", or something else?
Thanks!
grammatical-number abbreviations measuring-units tech-writing
grammatical-number abbreviations measuring-units tech-writing
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
edited Nov 19 at 8:08
Kris
32.3k541116
32.3k541116
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
asked Nov 19 at 2:07
Julian Newman
101
101
2
If you're doing it in a scientific context, it should just be 10 kg. No "weight", no "s".
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 2:35
1
By "ten kilograms' weight" I specifically mean the weight (as measured in newtons) possessed by a mass of ten kilograms. The term "kilogram-force" does exist to describe this, for which there is an abbreviation "kgf"; but I think that kgf is an actual unit that assumes a very specific value for the gravitational field strength. I just want to communicate "the weight of 10 kg of mass".
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 2:55
You only need to use the unit ("kg") in all contexts. For any disambiguation or for improving clarity, the sentence may need to rephrased, which is a different issue. HTH.
– Kris
Nov 19 at 8:05
I think "a/the weight of 10 kg" would be fine. Your audience will understand the difference between mass and weight, so I don't think there's any need to use the awkward "the weight of a 10 kg mass."
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 13:43
add a comment |
2
If you're doing it in a scientific context, it should just be 10 kg. No "weight", no "s".
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 2:35
1
By "ten kilograms' weight" I specifically mean the weight (as measured in newtons) possessed by a mass of ten kilograms. The term "kilogram-force" does exist to describe this, for which there is an abbreviation "kgf"; but I think that kgf is an actual unit that assumes a very specific value for the gravitational field strength. I just want to communicate "the weight of 10 kg of mass".
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 2:55
You only need to use the unit ("kg") in all contexts. For any disambiguation or for improving clarity, the sentence may need to rephrased, which is a different issue. HTH.
– Kris
Nov 19 at 8:05
I think "a/the weight of 10 kg" would be fine. Your audience will understand the difference between mass and weight, so I don't think there's any need to use the awkward "the weight of a 10 kg mass."
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 13:43
2
2
If you're doing it in a scientific context, it should just be 10 kg. No "weight", no "s".
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 2:35
If you're doing it in a scientific context, it should just be 10 kg. No "weight", no "s".
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 2:35
1
1
By "ten kilograms' weight" I specifically mean the weight (as measured in newtons) possessed by a mass of ten kilograms. The term "kilogram-force" does exist to describe this, for which there is an abbreviation "kgf"; but I think that kgf is an actual unit that assumes a very specific value for the gravitational field strength. I just want to communicate "the weight of 10 kg of mass".
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 2:55
By "ten kilograms' weight" I specifically mean the weight (as measured in newtons) possessed by a mass of ten kilograms. The term "kilogram-force" does exist to describe this, for which there is an abbreviation "kgf"; but I think that kgf is an actual unit that assumes a very specific value for the gravitational field strength. I just want to communicate "the weight of 10 kg of mass".
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 2:55
You only need to use the unit ("kg") in all contexts. For any disambiguation or for improving clarity, the sentence may need to rephrased, which is a different issue. HTH.
– Kris
Nov 19 at 8:05
You only need to use the unit ("kg") in all contexts. For any disambiguation or for improving clarity, the sentence may need to rephrased, which is a different issue. HTH.
– Kris
Nov 19 at 8:05
I think "a/the weight of 10 kg" would be fine. Your audience will understand the difference between mass and weight, so I don't think there's any need to use the awkward "the weight of a 10 kg mass."
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 13:43
I think "a/the weight of 10 kg" would be fine. Your audience will understand the difference between mass and weight, so I don't think there's any need to use the awkward "the weight of a 10 kg mass."
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 13:43
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
You don’t use the possessive with scientific units. In fact, you probably don’t have to use the possessive with any units, although there are figures of speech that appear to do so, e.g. a day’s pay for a day’s work.
In any event, the abbreviations for SI units always appear in their simple form directly after the number they apply to. Plural and possessive forms are not used.
BTW, it’s 10kg of mass, not weight. In ordinary life we use the term weight more freely, so it’s perfectly okay to say that a person “weighs 70kg”. Even in
science and engineering journals, you can sometimes see expressions like this in the description of everyday objects.
However, if you are writing for a technical audience, you should follow the appropriate SI style.
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
1
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
You wouldn't use the possessive like this. It's not usual to use the unit name kilogram as a noun meaning "a mass of 1 kilogram". So the issue of contraction is really a distraction here: even "ten kilograms' weight" doesn't look right.
If you want to be pedantically precise, you could say "the weight of a 10-kg mass".
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
You don’t use the possessive with scientific units. In fact, you probably don’t have to use the possessive with any units, although there are figures of speech that appear to do so, e.g. a day’s pay for a day’s work.
In any event, the abbreviations for SI units always appear in their simple form directly after the number they apply to. Plural and possessive forms are not used.
BTW, it’s 10kg of mass, not weight. In ordinary life we use the term weight more freely, so it’s perfectly okay to say that a person “weighs 70kg”. Even in
science and engineering journals, you can sometimes see expressions like this in the description of everyday objects.
However, if you are writing for a technical audience, you should follow the appropriate SI style.
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
1
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You don’t use the possessive with scientific units. In fact, you probably don’t have to use the possessive with any units, although there are figures of speech that appear to do so, e.g. a day’s pay for a day’s work.
In any event, the abbreviations for SI units always appear in their simple form directly after the number they apply to. Plural and possessive forms are not used.
BTW, it’s 10kg of mass, not weight. In ordinary life we use the term weight more freely, so it’s perfectly okay to say that a person “weighs 70kg”. Even in
science and engineering journals, you can sometimes see expressions like this in the description of everyday objects.
However, if you are writing for a technical audience, you should follow the appropriate SI style.
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
1
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
You don’t use the possessive with scientific units. In fact, you probably don’t have to use the possessive with any units, although there are figures of speech that appear to do so, e.g. a day’s pay for a day’s work.
In any event, the abbreviations for SI units always appear in their simple form directly after the number they apply to. Plural and possessive forms are not used.
BTW, it’s 10kg of mass, not weight. In ordinary life we use the term weight more freely, so it’s perfectly okay to say that a person “weighs 70kg”. Even in
science and engineering journals, you can sometimes see expressions like this in the description of everyday objects.
However, if you are writing for a technical audience, you should follow the appropriate SI style.
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
You don’t use the possessive with scientific units. In fact, you probably don’t have to use the possessive with any units, although there are figures of speech that appear to do so, e.g. a day’s pay for a day’s work.
In any event, the abbreviations for SI units always appear in their simple form directly after the number they apply to. Plural and possessive forms are not used.
BTW, it’s 10kg of mass, not weight. In ordinary life we use the term weight more freely, so it’s perfectly okay to say that a person “weighs 70kg”. Even in
science and engineering journals, you can sometimes see expressions like this in the description of everyday objects.
However, if you are writing for a technical audience, you should follow the appropriate SI style.
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
answered Nov 19 at 2:39
Global Charm
2,5242412
2,5242412
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
1
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
add a comment |
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
1
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
As explained in my reply to Peter Shor's comment, I actually want to communication "the weight possessed by a mass of 10 kg". So in this context, are you saying that "ten kilograms' weight" would be written "10 kg weight" (i.e. no apostrophe or s), or are you saying that it is simply not permitted in the scientific parlance to write (in any abbreviated or full form) the phrase "ten kilograms' weight"?
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:09
1
1
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
The construction you use in your response to Peter Shore, "the weight of 10 kg of mass", might be the best option. I agree with each of the other posters: a unit of measure gets no possessive. The distinction you are trying to make is not carried by an apostrophe. Think of it this way: units simply have no property rights, nor trouser pockets in which to put things.
– Kay V
Nov 19 at 3:39
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
@KayV: Thanks for your recommendation about the option. As for the rest of your comment: when you say "gets no possessive", I can't tell whether you mean that if it is necessary to write "ten kilograms' weight" in abbreviated form then this becomes "10 kg weight" with no apostrophe or s, or whether you mean that there simply is no valid way to write "ten kilograms' weight" within the standard units system.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 21:23
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
You wouldn't use the possessive like this. It's not usual to use the unit name kilogram as a noun meaning "a mass of 1 kilogram". So the issue of contraction is really a distraction here: even "ten kilograms' weight" doesn't look right.
If you want to be pedantically precise, you could say "the weight of a 10-kg mass".
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
You wouldn't use the possessive like this. It's not usual to use the unit name kilogram as a noun meaning "a mass of 1 kilogram". So the issue of contraction is really a distraction here: even "ten kilograms' weight" doesn't look right.
If you want to be pedantically precise, you could say "the weight of a 10-kg mass".
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
You wouldn't use the possessive like this. It's not usual to use the unit name kilogram as a noun meaning "a mass of 1 kilogram". So the issue of contraction is really a distraction here: even "ten kilograms' weight" doesn't look right.
If you want to be pedantically precise, you could say "the weight of a 10-kg mass".
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
You wouldn't use the possessive like this. It's not usual to use the unit name kilogram as a noun meaning "a mass of 1 kilogram". So the issue of contraction is really a distraction here: even "ten kilograms' weight" doesn't look right.
If you want to be pedantically precise, you could say "the weight of a 10-kg mass".
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
answered Nov 19 at 3:14
sumelic
44.5k7105206
44.5k7105206
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
add a comment |
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
To clarify - just in case you have misunderstood me (although I don't think you have) - I am not trying to refer to an actual object with mass 10 kg. I am simply trying to say "the amount of force equal to the weight possessed by 10 kg". In the past, this amount of force was called "10 kilograms-force", but the term is now somewhat outdated and also makes reference to a specific convention for the value of gravitational field strength. I find it hard to believe that there is no concise convention for communicating the amount of force equal to the weight of x kg of mass.
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 3:21
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
I see. Well, "a 10-kg mass" doesn't have to refer to any specific object, it could just be used as a way of referring to how any object with a mass of 10 kgs would behave.
– sumelic
Nov 19 at 3:25
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
@JulianNewman Weight is the force exerted on an object in a gravitational field. An airplane flies because its engines provide thrust (measured in newtons). The resistance of the air against the movement of the aircraft creates drag (also in newtons). When the thrust exceeds the drag, the mass of the aircraft is accelerated forward until it reaches a velocity where the thrust and the drag come into balance, since drag increases with velocity. At that point, what matters is the lift versus the weight, the latter being the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s^2.
– Global Charm
Nov 19 at 4:20
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473607%2fpossessive-for-abbreviation-of-a-regular-plural-noun%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
If you're doing it in a scientific context, it should just be 10 kg. No "weight", no "s".
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 2:35
1
By "ten kilograms' weight" I specifically mean the weight (as measured in newtons) possessed by a mass of ten kilograms. The term "kilogram-force" does exist to describe this, for which there is an abbreviation "kgf"; but I think that kgf is an actual unit that assumes a very specific value for the gravitational field strength. I just want to communicate "the weight of 10 kg of mass".
– Julian Newman
Nov 19 at 2:55
You only need to use the unit ("kg") in all contexts. For any disambiguation or for improving clarity, the sentence may need to rephrased, which is a different issue. HTH.
– Kris
Nov 19 at 8:05
I think "a/the weight of 10 kg" would be fine. Your audience will understand the difference between mass and weight, so I don't think there's any need to use the awkward "the weight of a 10 kg mass."
– Peter Shor
Nov 19 at 13:43