Thank you
Comment on How do I verbally say 2.1 ng/kg
Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 weeks agoYeah, personally I would say that it’s per kg bodyweight.
But I would also do my darndest to try write it, since “ng/kg” is kind of just nonsense. It makes it look like you could divide the grams out of that to get a fixed ratio, which is not correct at all.
andrewta@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
towerful@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
But it is a fixed ratio.
If it was in pounds, metric tons, moles or atomic mass units… It doesn’t change the ratio, the actual number.
Would it be acceptable to drop the unit all together?
“Lethal dose is 0.000000012 : 1 (substance : bodyweight)” (I made up the number).
I’m not sure if there is a better way of writing the ratio.
Could a fraction be more applicable?
“lethal dose is 1/600000 of bodyweight”
I’m sure it’s written as
ng/kgto show the base units are the same, and the rest is just “fiddling” scientific notationSuccessful_Try543@feddit.de 2 weeks ago
would not work, as they are no mass unit. 1 mol of Botox does not have the same weight as 1 mole of human (If that is defined at all, as organisms are no pure substances).
towerful@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Ah, yes good point
Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Well, what I meant with that, is that it’s semantically important that it’s
ng of the substanceperkg bodyweight.If it was
ng of the substanceperkg of the substance, then in proper mathematical physics, the unit would disappear completely.So, for example:
42000000000
ng of the substance/kg of the substanceIs equivalent to:
42000000000 * 0.000000001 *
kg of the substance/kg of the substanceWhich means in the end, you just have: 42
As my physics teacher would often say: Is that 42 potatoes or sausages or what is it?
A number without a unit is just devoid of meaning…