Siteadmin, Check users, Administrators
12,071
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: − + − |- − | U. S. usage || Value || Former British usage || − |- − | thousand || 10<sup>3</sup> = 1,000 || thousand − |- − | million || 10<sup>6</sup> = 1,000,000 || million − |- − | billion || 10<sup>9</sup> = 1,000,000,000 || thousand million or milliard − |- − | trillion || 10<sup>12</sup> = 1,000,000,000,000 || billion − |- − | quadrillion || 10<sup>15</sup> = 1,000,000,000,000,000 || thousand billion or (very rarely) billiard − |- − | quintillion || 10<sup>18</sup> = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 || trillion − |}
no edit summary
In technical or scientific writing, the problem does not arise because it is customary to use scientific notation (''10<sup>12</sup>'') or SI prefixes (''tera-'').
In technical or scientific writing, the problem does not arise because it is customary to use scientific notation (''10<sup>12</sup>'') or SI prefixes (''tera-'').
{|border=1
{{Powers of ten}}
Words for numbers above 10<sup>18</sup> may be found in dictionaries or tables of number names, but are almost never used. For years, mathematicians and computer scientists have enjoyed a sort of game of inventing systems for naming large numbers, but there is no practical need to render such names as words, and it is very questionable whether any of them should be considered to be "real" words; they are seldom encountered outside of discussions of large numbers and number naming.
Words for numbers above 10<sup>18</sup> may be found in dictionaries or tables of number names, but are almost never used. For years, mathematicians and computer scientists have enjoyed a sort of game of inventing systems for naming large numbers, but there is no practical need to render such names as words, and it is very questionable whether any of them should be considered to be "real" words; they are seldom encountered outside of discussions of large numbers and number naming.