This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Measurement, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.MeasurementWikipedia:WikiProject MeasurementTemplate:WikiProject MeasurementMeasurement articles
There are 454 grams in a pound, and 16 ounces in a pound, so divide 454 by 16 and you get 28.375 grams in 1 oz. Will someone please replace 28.35 with 28.375?
21:19, 21 May 2006 24.0.71.248
"A troy ounce (abbreviation: t oz) is equal to 480 grains. There are 12 troy ounces in a troy pound. Consequently, the international troy ounce is equal to about 31.103 476 grams." Excerpted from the article.
An ounce, conversion systems available online say, is 28.3495 grams. If the information is wrong it is grossly misleading. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
59.91.253.63 (
talk •
contribs)
The linked page has no information on how Pound-force is related to an Ounce-force.
That is entirely the fault, and the responsibility, of
User:Fibula. There was nothing there when he removed it from here, and there still is nothing there. As far as I can see, there wasn't any real good reason for him to remove it from here, either.
Gene Nygaard21:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)reply
It is a while ago now, but I believe my reasoning was as follows. In the case of the term "pound", the structure of the Wikipedia articles distinguishes between the units of mass (
Pound (mass)) and the units of force (
Pound-force), with the general distinction between units of mass and force being explained in the article on
Weight. I was attempting to conform the structure of the article(s) on the term "ounce" to that of those on the related term "pound". I do not know enough about the existence and use of the term "ounce" as a unit of force, so I did not want to create a new article, say,
Ounce (unit of force). Instead, I pointed the user towards the existing article
Pound-force. I'll add a sentence to the latter article to deal with the relationship.
Fibula23:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)reply
But ISTR that the "z" in "oz." is not the alphabetical "z", but a similar-looking symbol which also appears in the abbreviation "
viz." for videlicet. This article needs to explicitly cover this point; the ability to read Latin as written by monastic scribes is no longer a common skill. --
llywrch (
talk)
20:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Marie Thersa ounce
does this actualy exist? google searches go round in circles. the name doesn't make any sense - *why* should Ethiopia have a 'marie theresa' anything? think this subsection should be deleted unless someone can verify it.
raining_girl19:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)reply
if anything that makes me doubt the existence of the ounce more, as it isn't mentioned anywhere. Does however explain why there would be a Maria Theresa anything in Ethiopia.. Still think this is worth considering for deletion.
raining_girl14:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)reply
IT WAS USED AS CURRENCY, AND IS STILL BEING MINTED....BUT IT IS NOT A FULL TR OZ. OF SILVER. —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
205.208.227.29 (
talk •
contribs).
It seems from the
Maria Theresa thaler article that a huge number of these coins ended up in Ethiopia, but not only was it not a troy ounce of silver, it was not a troy ounce in total, instead being 28.0668g and so closer to an avoirdupois ounce. --
Henrygb16:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
For the MT ounce, see
Apothecaries' system#Habsburg standard. As for the Ethiopian ounce, I can attest it was used to measure gold before Maria Theresa was born; I've seen it used in 16th century writings. Where they came up with this unit is unclear to me: they could have (1) adopted it from the Ancient Romans; (2) from the Arabs; (3) from European visitors in the 16th century; or (4) invented it independently. --
llywrch (
talk)
20:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)reply
ounce, unit of weight in the avoirdupois system, equal to 1/16 pound (437 1/2 grains), and in the troy and apothecaries’ systems, equal to 480 grains, or 1/12 pound.
Maybe we could add something that includes "in the USA" and put the word "ordinary" in parentheses after "avoirdupois." Even though the average older or well-educated adult in the USA would know that there are 16 ounces in a "regular American pound," some young people, immigrants, and people in other countries might seriously not know.
Could add mention of these based on : in Simpson, A. D. C and Connor, R. D, 2004. The Mass of the English Troy Pound in the Eighteenth Century. Annals of Science 61 (3): 321-349, page 329: "From English usage and from Pegolotti’s account, we know that the ratio of the size of the English troy ounce (or the Bruges silver ounce) to the English tower ounce (or Cologne ounce) is 16:15, the ratio of Paris ounce to the Cologne ounce is 21:20, and the ratio of the eight-ounce Paris and Bruges gold mark to the six-ounce Bruges silver mark is 21:16.35 If these ratios are precise (and it is part of our purpose here to demonstrate that this is so) then, in terms of English troy grains, the Paris ounce is accurately 472.5 grains, and the tower or Cologne ounce is 450 grains, where the English troy ounce at 480 grains defines the troy grain."
Rod57 (
talk)
12:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Historically, people did not know or distinguish between weight and mass. Before Newton, we didn't have precise definition of force so I bet it would be meaningless to talk about the unit of weight in the past. While the concept of mass is not fully understood today, the definition of mass within the context of Special Relativity is well-defined. Special Relativity is a very appropriate model for most of the cases so long the curvature of spacetime is not significant. Weight is the measurement of the gravitational force that is exerted on a body within a gravitational field. I do not think people really wanted to measure the force albeit the need of scientific research. What people really wanted to know may be the mass which many people thought as the measurement of the amount of matter. Strictly speaking, mass IS NOT the measurement of the amount of matter. In fact, matter IS NOT a well-defined concept within Physics. Nevertheless, it is safe to say that the 'amount of matter' is at least 'directly proportional' to the mass although there isn't a time-independent proportionality constant. See also
Force,
Weight,
Mass in special relativity,
Mass in general relativity,
Special relativity and
General relativity and
definition of matterThljcl (
talk)
11:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)reply
I find it ironic that several of these articles on weights and measures refer to units of weight as measuring mass. Anyone that thinks they can easily determine mass by measuring weight will find out that they will be imprecise. Weight is dependent on local gravitational acceleration which varies depending on where you are. Mass doesn't change with location while weight does. Units of weight are not units of mass though equivalences are used (by assuming a fixed value for g). To be correct, these weights should not be referred to as measuring mass. This was drilled into me 40 years ago in university physics. Something tells me changing the multitude of articles would just produce an editing war.
99.245.248.91 (
talk)
23:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)reply
Perhaps we should have a box explaining the difference between mass and weight. Then in the article always call these units "units of weight" exclusively.
Will (
Talk -
contribs)
07:16, 5 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I have to agree with anom
99.245.248.91 as of viewing various measures articles today, things are all bolluxed up and contradictory. I'm sincerely alarmed and embarrassed for the encyclopedia project.
HE on the other hand has it correct. Pounds and ounces are WEIGHT and/or FORCE based terms in systems of measurement, or conversions between same. In any measurement system, because F=ma (we can rewrite that for Weight... W=mg, where g is the acceleration force in one gravity) either mass or weight are derived units of the other. (Force is a product, so always derived) People do NOT weigh kilograms, but weights are so pervasive in customary life and units, they have been perverted. These basic unit articles and those linking them need gone over to straighten out the mis-calling such units as units of mass, and a need to clarify the differences. This template suggested by
Will Pittenger is likely the way forward. // FrankB19:18, 12 September 2016 (UTC) (Engineer)reply
Unit of Mass is wrong—Should unit of weight
Calling the "ounce" (and pound") a "unit of mass" is wrong. We need some way to explain these units are "units of weight"—not mass. Now many users would be very confused. If we aren't careful, we could end up with an edit war.
My suggestion would be to have a box like a sidebar providing a brief summary of the difference between weight and mass. If the imperial system has a unit of measure for mass, we should provide links to it.
Will (
Talk -
contribs)
07:24, 5 December 2015 (UTC)reply
If ounces and pounds aren't units of mass, then does that also mean that there is no way to convert ounces and pounds into grams, because grams are a unit of mass rather than weight? That seems a bit odd. But if it is true, then many articles besides this one have to be changed. —
Eru·
tuon20:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Given that the ounce has been defined in terms of pounds and therefore grams since
1966 in the US, and in the UK, Canada, and Australia in 1959-1964, it is clearly a unit of mass. As the
Pound (mass) article says, "Usage of the unqualified term pound reflects the historical conflation of mass and weight. This accounts for the modern distinguishing terms pound-mass and pound-force." The term ounce-force can be used if necessary. --
Macrakis (
talk)
17:19, 8 November 2017 (UTC)reply
This is silly. The article you quoted even admits to conflation of mass and weight for the pound. Why would a respected encyclopedia repeat this conflation? That's silly! Maybe explain the historical confusion, and give the real definition of the unit. --
208.78.72.18 (
talk)
15:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)reply
The problem is that there are really three separate units that are commonly referred to as an "ounce": ounce mass, ounce force, and fluid ounce (which is a measure of volume). We should either change the lead to say that the ounce is a unit of mass, weight, or volume, or we need to move this article to
Ounce (mass) and create
Ounce (force) to go along with
Fluid ounce. --
Ahecht (
TALK PAGE)
15:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)reply
conversion between ounces and fluid ounces of water missing
The article is missing information about the very close equivalence between the weight of a fluid ounce of water and an ounce of water and also between the weight of a pint of water and a pound of water.
16 fluid ounces = 16.6908 ounces i.e. about 4% more
so 1 pint = 1.043175 pounds i.e. about 4% more (needs to be said again)