| |
 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Mathematics Forum » Named powers of ten |
|
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Peter Fairbrother |
 Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Guy Macon wrote:
[quote:e7f6c4400e]
I am putting together a table of prefixes and suffixes used to
designate named powers of ten. I would very much appreciate it
if someone would look the table over and see if I made any
silly errors, and would especially appreciate any suggestions
for filling in the entries marked "???". Thanks!
[/quote:e7f6c4400e]
Google 10^100
Googleplex 10^(10^100)
The UK billion etc is no longer used in the UK. I don't know the formalities
involved, but in practice in the UK a billion is assumed to be 10^9, and has
been for a while.
I've seen zeppo, harpo and groucho used as prefixes for 10e30, 10e33 and
10e36, beyond xena (which seems more common than xenna, eg try a google of
xenabyte and xenabyte).
No buffy though.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter Fairbrother |
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Peter Fairbrother wrote:
[quote:e2f134bc79]I've seen zeppo, harpo and groucho used as prefixes for 10e30, 10e33 and
10e36, beyond xena (which seems more common than xenna, eg try a google of
xenabyte and xennabyte).
^ oops
No buffy though.
[/quote:e2f134bc79]
And Bronto - don't remember what value it was. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Phil Carmody |
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
mensanator@aol.compost (Mensanator) writes:
[quote:f18714de8f]P peta- 1.0E+15 ??? 1 000 000 000 000 000
billiard?
T tera- 1.0E+12 billion 1 000 000 000 000
G giga- 1.0E+9 milliard 1 000 000 000
M mega- 1.0E+6 million 1 000 000
[/quote:f18714de8f]
Unattested back formation.
Milliard, however, is as old as the hills, and, modulo transliterations
and ending changes, the term used in something like half of the usual
European languages.
Phil
--
They no longer do my traditional winks tournament lunch - liver and bacon.
It's just what you need during a winks tournament lunchtime to replace lost
.... liver. -- Anthony Horton, 2004/08/27 at the Cambridge 'Long Vac.' |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| shedar |
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote in message
news:10oakbnnfbus246@corp.supernews.com...
[quote:36bacb2022]
I am putting together a table of prefixes and suffixes used to
designate named powers of ten. I would very much appreciate it
if someone would look the table over and see if I made any
silly errors, and would especially appreciate any suggestions
for filling in the entries marked "???". Thanks!
[/quote:36bacb2022]
Could you post a final version on the Web and give us a link to it?
Shedar |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Guy Macon |
| Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:41 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
shedar wrote:
[quote:e5edc944bc]
"Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote in message
news:10oakbnnfbus246@corp.supernews.com...
I am putting together a table of prefixes and suffixes used to
designate named powers of ten. I would very much appreciate it
if someone would look the table over and see if I made any
silly errors, and would especially appreciate any suggestions
for filling in the entries marked "???". Thanks!
Could you post a final version on the Web and give us a link to it?
Shedar
[/quote:e5edc944bc]
That was my plan. I am also doing a powers of 2 page.
I will post both when I am done.
If If Kilograms is Kg and Megagarms is MG, what are Googlegrams
and Googleplexgrams? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Michael Jørgensen |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:27 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Phil Carmody" <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:874qkagxfy.fsf@nonospaz.fatphil.org...
[quote:1e30e9f68a]mensanator@aol.compost (Mensanator) writes:
P peta- 1.0E+15 ??? 1 000 000 000 000 000
billiard?
T tera- 1.0E+12 billion 1 000 000 000 000
G giga- 1.0E+9 milliard 1 000 000 000
M mega- 1.0E+6 million 1 000 000
Unattested back formation.
Milliard, however, is as old as the hills, and, modulo transliterations
and ending changes, the term used in something like half of the usual
European languages.
[/quote:1e30e9f68a]
Here's a data point for you: In Danish, 10^15 is written "billiard" and
10^21 is written "trilliard".
-Michael.
[quote:1e30e9f68a]
Phil
--
They no longer do my traditional winks tournament lunch - liver and bacon.
It's just what you need during a winks tournament lunchtime to replace
lost
... liver. -- Anthony Horton, 2004/08/27 at the Cambridge 'Long Vac.'[/quote:1e30e9f68a] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jeroen Boschma |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 2:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Guy Macon wrote:
[quote:4452cd1ffc]
I am putting together a table of prefixes and suffixes used to
designate named powers of ten. I would very much appreciate it
if someone would look the table over and see if I made any
silly errors, and would especially appreciate any suggestions
for filling in the entries marked "???". Thanks!
[/quote:4452cd1ffc]
See http://members.home.nl/j.megens/gewichtig.htm
There seems to be a nice system for european and US.
For the number that indicates the power of ten, the US use: 3 + 3p, where 'p' corresponds with the
number as indicated by the Latin translation of the prefix of its name. Example: quadrillon, quad
means 4, so 10^(3+3*4)=10^15.
European use a similar system: 6p + 3i, where 'i'=0 if postfix is 'illion' and 'i'=1 if postfix is
'illiard'. So, for european, quadrillon is 10^(6*4+0)=10^24.
European thus use the same names as US, but alternate 'illion' and 'illard' consequently, thereby
stretching the available range by a factor two up to 10^66 for decilliard.
Jeroen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Phil Carmody |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 3:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Michael Jørgensen" <ingen@ukendt.dk> writes:
[quote:c40f1bac8c]"Phil Carmody" <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:874qkagxfy.fsf@nonospaz.fatphil.org...
mensanator@aol.compost (Mensanator) writes:
P peta- 1.0E+15 ??? 1 000 000 000 000 000
billiard?
T tera- 1.0E+12 billion 1 000 000 000 000
G giga- 1.0E+9 milliard 1 000 000 000
M mega- 1.0E+6 million 1 000 000
Unattested back formation.
Milliard, however, is as old as the hills, and, modulo transliterations
and ending changes, the term used in something like half of the usual
European languages.
Here's a data point for you: In Danish, 10^15 is written "billiard" and
10^21 is written "trilliard".
[/quote:c40f1bac8c]
Do you have a date for those?
Phil
--
They no longer do my traditional winks tournament lunch - liver and bacon.
It's just what you need during a winks tournament lunchtime to replace lost
.... liver. -- Anthony Horton, 2004/08/27 at the Cambridge 'Long Vac.' |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| George Cox |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Guy Macon wrote:
[quote:e974b58c40]
...
If If Kilograms is Kg and
[/quote:e974b58c40]
Should be small k's. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Helmut Richter |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 4:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Phil Carmody:
[quote:8ee458f7fd]Milliard, however, is as old as the hills, and, modulo transliterations
[/quote:8ee458f7fd]
I take German "Billiarde", "Trilliarde" as absolutely normal words for
10^15 and 10^21, and have done so since I am capable to work with such
numbers (say, for more than 40 years). Unless I see any compelling
argument, I assume that the words have "always" been around, i.e. as long
as there contexts in which such number occur, e.g. astronomy.
Larger numbers make no sense in any language or context: the few people to
whom they make sense prefer to work with powers of ten, e.g. Loschmidt's
constant (also called Avogadro's) would sound funny as "602 Trilliarden 3
Trillionen".
[quote:8ee458f7fd]and ending changes, the term used in something like half of the usual
European languages.
[/quote:8ee458f7fd]
When I learnt these numbers, one half of "the usual European languages"
was American English, the other half was all others including British
English. Meanwhile, the British have (partially? fully?) been converted.
Helmut Richter |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dik T. Winter |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 6:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <slrncodbud.3o8.a282244@lxhri01.lrz.lrz-muenchen.de> hhr-m@web.de writes:
[quote:84e5e8971a]When I learnt these numbers, one half of "the usual European languages"
was American English, the other half was all others including British
English. Meanwhile, the British have (partially? fully?) been converted.
[/quote:84e5e8971a]
The history is interesting because both usages derive from French.
The billion = 10^12 system was invented by Nicolas Chuquet somewhere
in the 15th century. In the 16th century French mathematicians started
to use the billion = 10^9 system, eventually becoming the standard in
France. In 1948 the French reverted back to the older system, and in
1961 it became compulsory by law.
From national usage in other countries you can get an approximation of the
time that usage was derived, and there are quite a few countries where
the billion = 10^9 is used.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter Fairbrother |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Helmut Richter wrote:
[quote:e51493909a]Larger numbers make no sense in any language or context: the few people to
whom they make sense prefer to work with powers of ten, e.g. Loschmidt's
constant (also called Avogadro's) would sound funny as "602 Trilliarden 3
Trillionen".
[/quote:e51493909a]
It seems to be getting larger - I have a terabyte of storage, and I know
people who have petabytes. I have used the word etabytes too, or is it
exabytes, that's 10^18, a trillion long scale, or a quintillion short scale.
602,215 of them is Avogadro's constant.
Th Brits never really used "milliard" - ask a reasonably educated older Brit
and he will say "what's that, something French isn't it?", but he won't know
how big it is.
They did use 10^12 billions, when 10^9 was a thousand million, not a
milliard, but they don't use them any more, just 10^9 billions, and 10^12 is
now a trillion. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter Fairbrother |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
shedar wrote:
[quote:22632af51d]mensanator@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1099343897.469208.271750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[/quote:22632af51d]
[quote:22632af51d]I wonder if "googleplex" and "google" also had "bogus" status once,
:-)
Once? They're still bogus.
Eh, not entirely bogus anymore because many dictionaries have clear entries
for them. But I haven't checked it out in OED.
[/quote:22632af51d]
Yep, they're both in, even in the Shorter OED. As is the centillion, and the
centilliard apparently exists too, though it's not in.
Then there's googleplexplex (or googleduplex), and googleplexplexplex ...
And how about Skews 1955 second, 10^(10^(10^1000)). It's a named power of 10
...
--
Peter Fairbrother |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dik T. Winter |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <JgAhd.92900$Pl.32521@pd7tw1no> "shedar" <nobody@nonesuch.com> writes:
[quote:0c37fc5664]mensanator@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1099343897.469208.271750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
shedar wrote:
....
I wonder if "googleplex" and "google" also had "bogus" status once,
:-)
Once? They're still bogus.
Eh, not entirely bogus anymore because many dictionaries have clear entries
for them. But I haven't checked it out in OED.
[/quote:0c37fc5664]
They were bogus from the start. The name comes from what a child thought
about such numbers. So the names are bogus, on the other hand, they are
numbers. And as such "googlegram" makes no sense at all as a unit, unless
you think that things like "twogram" make sense.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dik T. Winter |
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:33 am
|
|