|
|
|
|
|
July 25th, 2003, 09:56 AM
|
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,174
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Quote:
Originally posted by Taera:
OFF TOPIC what are the names for higher numbers anyways? its Million, Billion...?
|
10^3: Thousand; 10^6: Million; 10^9: Billion; 10^12: Trillion ...
... By one definition of the words, anyway.
Check the italics; they're numbers (or nearly so - I could be a letter off in highlighting them, or there could have been some warp to it over time) in Latin (or is it Greek?) Mi: one; Bi: two; Tri: three. Multiply the matching number by three, add three, and you get the number of zero's that follow a one to get that cardinal number. In theory, you can learn to count in Greek (or is it Latin?) and go as high as you like in that fashion, but it quickly becomes easier to use scientific notation, so almost nobody uses the standard Version for cardinals above a trillion.
[ July 25, 2003, 08:56: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]
__________________
Of course, by the time I finish this post, it will already be obsolete. C'est la vie.
|
July 25th, 2003, 10:11 AM
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
well, i was just curious about what other names for big numbers are there - like that sextillion, 10^21
[ July 25, 2003, 09:11: Message edited by: Taera ]
__________________
Let the game begin!
Green bug from outa space!
|
July 25th, 2003, 12:48 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Scientists don't use words like million, billion, trillion because they mean different numbers in different countries. It's too early in the morning for me to work out the digits. Suffice to say, most European Languages use mill- to mean a thousand. But American english uses the term billion where the British term milliard is otherwise used.
And I doubt anyone uses tetartillion, quintillion, and I might even be giving the wrong words here.
The article uses sextillion, but face it, the journalist just liked the word. But then there would be heptillion, octillion, nonillion, decaillion, undecaillion, dodecaillion, ... you all know the sequence. You. Yeah you, guy who played DnD, with the polyhedria dice, I'm talking to you.
[ July 25, 2003, 14:57: Message edited by: Arkcon ]
|
July 25th, 2003, 07:03 PM
|
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 2,592
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Quote:
Originally posted by Narf'scompatshop:
trillion.
and there's a googal to, but i forget how large that is. mathematician's son came up with that. sounds about right for a really big number.
|
10^100 It is bigger than number of atoms in Universe, Last time I counted them
__________________
It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. - Voltaire
|
July 25th, 2003, 08:34 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Quote:
Originally posted by oleg:
10^100 It is bigger than number of atoms in Universe, Last time I counted them
|
That's the way I heard it as well. Something on the order of 10^40 atoms of hydrogen in the entire universe (as best as we can understand it so far). And perhaps 10^44 seconds in the lifespan of the universe -- from big bang to big crunch or heat death as I recall. That would be in the dodecillions -- if someone wanted to use that name for the number
[ July 26, 2003, 01:18: Message edited by: Arkcon ]
|
July 26th, 2003, 01:42 AM
|
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 42
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
not all the atoms in the universe are hydrogen. most, i guess but not all.
|
July 26th, 2003, 02:03 AM
|
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 2,592
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Quote:
Originally posted by Narf'scompatshop:
not all the atoms in the universe are hydrogen. most, i guess but not all.
|
Number of all other atoms is completely negligeable. Less than a tiny fraction of percent.
__________________
It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. - Voltaire
|
July 26th, 2003, 03:05 PM
|
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brazil
Posts: 827
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Here's how it goes, AFAIK : million, billion, trillion, quadrillion, quintillion, sextillion, septillion, octillion, nonillion, decillion. This sequence uses the Latin roots for numbers, not the Greek roots (tetra-, penta-, hexa-, hepta-).
Speaking a Latin language can be handy once in a very great while.
And 'milliard' is actually a French term which was borrowed by British English.
[ July 26, 2003, 14:08: Message edited by: Erax ]
__________________
Have you ever had... the sudden feeling... that God is out to GET YOU?
Well, my girl dumped me and I'm stuck with the raftmates from Hell in the middle of the sea and... what was the question again???
|
July 26th, 2003, 03:52 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Right. So. For American English at least, and for the truly pedantic nerds among us -- (The applicant for your consideration as the biggest nerd speaking here, ahem) -- the list would go like this:
(Wish I knew how to set the small font like everyone else does)
10^3 thousand
10^6 million,
10^9 billion,
10^12 trillion,
10^15 quadrillion,
10^18 quintillion,
10^21 sextillion,
10^24 septillion,
10^27 octillion,
10^30 nonillion,
10^33 decillion
10^36 undecillion
10^39 dodecillion
Insert - 10^40, number of hydrogen atoms in the universe, we guess (well astrophysicists, not me personally)
10^42 tridecilion
Insert - 10^44, number of seconds in the lifetime of the universe, we guess
10^45 quadecilion
10^48 quintdecillion
10^51 sexdecillion
10^54 septdecillion
10^57 octdecillion
10^60 nondecillion
10^63 eicoillion
Insert - 10^64, energy, in joules, of the Big Bang, we guess, unless someone was there. (anyone?)
10^66 uneicoillion
Insert - Official beginning of numbers that have no meaning to human minds
|
July 26th, 2003, 06:40 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Star survey reaches 70 sextillion
Quote:
Insert - Official beginning of numbers that have no meaning to human minds
|
Actually, numbers greater than 4 have no meaning to the human mind. Every number beyond that is thought of as sets of 4s (including partial 4s). Of course, this is at the most basic level of thinking, and we are obviously quite capable of fooling ourselves into thinking we can comprehend big numbers.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|