Talk:Ounce

This article, as well as that for pound (mass), need extensive review and checking for correctness.

1/16

How did it turn into 1/16th when the word ounce was derived from 1/12th? Novalia (talk) 10:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Tael=Traditional Ounce?!"

The tael should *not* be called the traditional ounce. The two units had different origins.Gamerktc12 (talk) 11:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol

What's "℥" ? In the UK, the symbol is "oz". -- Tarquin

That symbol is ancient and was especially common in apothecary usage. Christoph Päper 07:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It'd be great if anything could add the etymology/history of the symbol ℥. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.60.27 (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grams in 1 oz.

One ounce of gold is always 31.1 g.

Really? Isn't it, as the article says, 31.104... g? 03:38, 13 May 2006 218.102.71.117

Does one always have to insert “approximately” or “circa” even when it’s obvious? Christoph Päper 07:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

An avoirdupois pound is exactly 453.59237 g today, which makes an avoirdupois ounce about 28.35 g indeed. Christoph Päper 07:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How much the hell is an ounce?

"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)

You didn’t read the article, did you? Christoph Päper 19:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ounce (unit of force) see Pound-force

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 Nygaard 21:56, 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. Fibula 23:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of "Oz"

Why is it "Oz" when there isn't a Z in ounce?

I was wondering the same thing.

From Old Italian ... see the intro. J ɪ m p 16:31, 28 January 2008 (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_girl 19:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Theresa thaler -- but I do not know whether it was used as a unit of weight besides currency. Christoph Päper 18:15, 16 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_girl 14:35, 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. --Henrygb 16:16, 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]

Article misses the point.

This article needs to explain one thing: How much is an ounce! A plain, simple, american ounce! How much? Please respond on my Talkpage. [[User:Tutthoth-Ankhre|Tutthoth-Ankhre~ The Pharaoh of the Universe]] (talk) 20:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many normal ounces are in a normal pound? "X grams!!!" What useless answer. HOW MANY ARE IN A POUND? (50.92.182.106 (talk) 10:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

This user actually has a point. Zyxwv99 (talk) 16:35, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopædia Britannica Online has:

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.

Zyxwv99 (talk) 16:47, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paris, Tower / Cologne ounces

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]

Italian ? not Spanish ?

Onza is the Spanish word for ounce... didn't come oz from the Spanish onza ? Kintaro (talk) 09:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology: < Italian oz, 15th-cent. graphic abbreviation of onza ounce n.1

(OED Third Edition, March 2005)

Zyxwv99 (talk) 00:02, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Humorous use of the ambiguity of the word ounce

I recall being caught out once by a smart Alec schoolboy who asked me which weighed more, an ounce of gold or an ounce of feathers...

Franciscus montmartinensis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.44.12 (talk) 16:04, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unit of Weight?

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 matter Thljcl (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. // FrankB 19:18, 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·tuon 20:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, such conversions assume 1G. Will (Talk - contribs) 02:16, 16 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]

I have rewritten the lead to clarify the common (mass) meaning, as well as the other meanings; take a look. --Macrakis (talk) 19:05, 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)

https://metric-calculator.com/convert-fl-oz-to-oz.htm --Espoo (talk) 08:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]