Measuring volume: Solid vs Liquid/Gas

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the rationale behind using different units for measuring volume, specifically cubic centimeters (cm³) for solids and liters (L) for liquids and gases. Participants agree that milliliters (mL) and cubic centimeters are equivalent, but emphasize that historical conventions dictate the use of different units based on the state of matter. The practicality of using cubic meters for all measurements is questioned, with consensus that it would be cumbersome. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding measurement conventions in various scientific and practical contexts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of volume measurement units (e.g., liters, cubic centimeters)
  • Familiarity with the states of matter (solid, liquid, gas)
  • Basic knowledge of historical measurement systems (e.g., mks and cgs units)
  • Awareness of practical applications in fields like medicine and physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the historical development of volume measurement units
  • Explore the differences between mks and cgs unit systems
  • Study practical applications of volume measurement in medicine
  • Investigate the implications of using consistent measurement units across different states of matter
USEFUL FOR

Students, educators, and professionals in fields such as physics, chemistry, and medicine who seek to understand the conventions and practicalities of volume measurement.

ElijahRockers
Gold Member
Messages
260
Reaction score
10
I was just curious... what is the practical reason behind having two separate units for measuring volume? For instance, we can use cubic centimeters and mL interchangeably in practical medicine, i.e. injections. But we tend to use cubic (centi)meters for solids, and liters for liquids/gasses.

Why don't we measure all volume by the same unit? That is, why don't we measure the volume of an gold ingot in terms of liters? Or perhaps the volume of a bucket of water in cubic meters?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Not sure what your question is.

mL and cubic centimeter are the same thing (historically I believe they were not, but they are now). Yes, we use liters for liquid volumes and cm3 but these days that's just a meaningless convention.

Using cubic meter for everything would be impractical.
 
Borek said:
Not sure what your question is.

We have a single property, volume, measured in different ways depending on the phase of the substance. We measure solids with cubed distances, and fluids with liters. I am trying to get some insight as to the reason things are done this way. Are there any particular historical reasons? Practical reasons? etc. etc...

Borek said:
Using cubic meter for everything would be impractical.

What about liters? Is there anything impractical about measuring the volume of a solid in terms of liters?
 
Check wikipedia article on liter, it explains where the difference came from.

As I said, mL and cm3 are now perfectly equivalent, and we just by convention use mL (and L) for volumes of things that are not solid and can be poured.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ElijahRockers
What difference does it make? There are mks units and cgs units. Conversion to the units you wants is one calculation away. Personally, I like mks units, but physicists like cgs units.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K