Which of these sockets are in the right place? (If any)

[JohnW2]

Well, no. It is not a unit.

Indeed. As I said, that's what I meant with my initial comment about "not legitimate", although I wasn't clear enough in how I wrote it.

Ok? Do you mean they don't ever do that except when they are wrong?

Yes, I do.

 

[morqthana]

As EFLI has implied, I don't think that "inches square" is actually a legitimate term.

Nonsense.

It is a perfectly legitimate measurement.

Like "1 metre long".

Or "3 cubits in diameter".

As I think he is saying, "inches squared" is legitimate, and has the same meaning as "square inches".

He's wrong.

What is three squared?

 

[morqthana]

That's because it is not actually clear what is meant.

It's clear what is meant by the term used.

If that isn't the meaning whoever used the term intended, then they've made a mistake.

4 square inches is [2 inches] square.

Not necessarily, but I take your point.

2 square inches is 2 [inches squared]; in².

No it isn't.

2 square inches is a square approximately 1.4142" per side.

Or a rectangle 2" x 1".

Or a circle approximately 1.6" in diameter.

2 inches squared is 4 square inches.

'in²' is not pronounced "inches squared" it is pronounced "square inches".

However - people do not distinguish between the meanings.

Indeed not.

 

[JohnW2]

Nonsense. It is a perfectly legitimate measurement. Like "1 metre long". Or "3 cubits in diameter".

You don't seem to have read my subsequent posts, in which I clarified that what I meant (but didn't write clearly enough) was that "inch square" is not a legitimate unit of measurement (whereas "inch squared", or "square inch" are).

 

[ebee]

Oh dear what the heck have I started with my casual observation?
Ebbe - keep yer gob shut! LOL

Just for the record I`d say 4 inches square or 4 inches squared means a square 4 inches each side thereby 16 sq inches in area.

Yet we write out a conductor area csa as 2.5 millimetre square (or squared) when we actually men 2.5 square millimetres irrespective of whether it is a circle, an oval, a triangle, a rectangle or actually square etc etc. It is the amount of meat as an area but we write it as if it is 2.5mm x 2.5mm = 4.84 sq mm.

I had better get me coat!

 

[EFLImpudence]

Just for the record I`d say 4 inches square or 4 inches squared means a square 4 inches each side thereby 16 sq inches in area.

If you are right (you aren't) then we can't use "mm²" to mean the csa of a conductor.

 

[SUNRAY]

Not sure I would go that far. It depends what one is meaning.
I think. for example, "4 inches square" is when something is 4" x 4"; therefore 16 square inches.


Yes - with the 'd'.

However - people do not distinguish between the meanings.

I think they do.

 

[SUNRAY]

Yes, agreed. I probably wasn't clear enough - what I meant is that "inches square" is not a legitimate unit.

I think they do

 

[SUNRAY]

As EFLI has implied, I don't think that "inches square" is actually a legitimate term.

I think it is

 

[EFLImpudence]

I think they do.

Depends who you mean by people, I suppose.

Most just say "2.5" or at a push "2.5mm".

 

[EFLImpudence]

See, I said people are confused.

 

[SUNRAY]

Well, no. It is not a unit.

May not be 'unit' as such but it is a term in EVERY DAY USE

 

[morqthana]

You don't seem to have read my subsequent posts, in which I clarified that what I meant (but didn't write clearly enough) was that "inch square" is not a legitimate unit of measurement (whereas "inch squared", or "square inch" are).

You said it wasn't a unit of measurement. True

But I was replying to you saying

I don't think that "inches square" is actually a legitimate term.

And it is a perfectly legitimate term.

"I have here a wooden box, 2m long, 1m wide, and 50cm high".

'm' and 'cm' are valid units.

'long', 'wide', & 'high' are not valid units.

But 'm long','m wide' etc are perfectly valid terms.

 

[SUNRAY]

Just for the record I`d say 4 inches square or 4 inches squared means a square 4 inches each side thereby 16 sq inches in area.

If you are right (you aren't) then we can't use "mm²" to mean the csa of a conductor.

Your quote from ebee it totally correct, 4 inches square is a square of 16 square inches.
I agree with

we can't use "mm²" to mean the csa of a conductor.

But some dickhead somewhere in the dim distant paste made the mistake and we're stuck with it.

If I ordered a 10ft square plastic shed in blue I'd be totally pi55ed off if a portable sh1thouse turned up.

 

[morqthana]

I think they do.

EFLImpudence doesn't:

2 square inches is 2 [inches squared]; in².