I know he's right, though I (obstinately) disagree with him and quite possibly the rest of the scientific world. I'm old enough to remember the debate over whether kilo should be an upper case character because all the other multipliers are upper case – e.g. Mega, Giga etc. And the lower case qualifiers are all divisors – milli, micro etc. In my opinion the small k for kilo is an anomaly better resolved by accepting the coincidence with an upper case K for Kelvin and allowing the context to resolve the conflict.
One must remember that kg is not a multiple – it is the basic unit of mass – so that is the reason for the lower case ‘k’. A carry-over from the previous systems perhaps? But I expect there was a quandary of adopting the gram as the basic unit of weight (there is a problem with mass and weight if both do not have have the same equivalent base unit). There was always (well, for a long time) a standard metre and kilogram in existence, as well as a lot of standards copied from those standards.
I remember several measurement systems over my time, one being the cgs system (centimetre gram second). They all had to make some compromise or have some idiosyncrasies within those systems.
Hence it is kg, not KG. Everything else falls into place quite well using upper and lower case multipliers. But I don’t think they will ever decimalise our normal time units.🙂
Edited By not done it yet on 10/01/2020 22:41:24