Length Area Volume Mass [1e-19 m]? [1e-19 m2]? [1e-19 m3]? 1e-19 kg [1e-18 m]? [1e-18 m2]? [1e-18 m3]? [1e-18 kg]? [1e-17 m]? [1e-17 m2]? [1e-17 m3]? [1e-17 kg]? [1e-16 m]? [1e-16 m2]? [1e-16 m3]? [1e-16 kg]? 1e-15 m [1e-15 m2]? [1e-15 m3]? [1e-15 kg]? [1e-14 m]? [1e-14 m2]? [1e-14 m3]? [1e-14 kg]? 1e-13 m [1e-13 m2]? [1e-13 m3]? [1e-13 kg]? [1e-12 m]? [1e-12 m2]? [1e-12 m3]? [1e-12 kg]? 1e-11 m [1e-11 m2]? [1e-11 m3]? [1e-11 kg]? 1e-10 m [1e-10 m2]? [1e-10 m3]? [1e-10 kg]? 1e-9 m [1e-9 m2]? [1e-9 m3]? [1e-9 kg]? 1e-8 m [1e-8 m2]? [1e-8 m3]? [1e-8 kg]? 1e-7 m [1e-7 m2]? [1e-7 m3]? [1e-7 kg]? 1e-6 m [1e-6 m2]? [1e-6 m3]? [1e-6 kg]? 1e-5 m [1e-5 m2]? 1e-5 m3 [1e-5 kg]? 1e-4 m [1e-4 m2]? 1e-4 m3 [1e-4 kg]? 1e-3 m [1e-3 m2]? 1e-3 m3 [1e-3 kg]? 1e-2 m 1e-2 m2 1e-2 m3 1e-2 kg 1e-1 m 1e-1 m2 1e-1 m3 1e-1 kg 1e0 m 1e0 m2 1e0 m3 [1e0 kg]? 1e1 m 1e1 m2 [1e1 m3]? [1e1 kg]? 1e2 m 1e2 m2 [1e2 m3]? 1e2 kg 1e3 m 1e3 m2 [1e3 m3]? 1e3 kg 1e4 m 1e4 m2 [1e4 m3]? [1e4 kg]? 1e5 m 1e5 m2 [1e5 m3]? [1e5 kg]? 1e6 m 1e6 m2 [1e6 m3]? [1e6 kg]? 1e7 m 1e7 m2 [1e7 m3]? [1e7 kg]? 1e8 m 1e8 m2 [1e8 m3]? [1e8 kg]? 1e9 m 1e9 m2 [1e9 m3]? [1e9 kg]? 1e10 m 1e10 m2 [1e10 m3]? [1e10 kg]? 1e11 m 1e11 m2 [1e11 m3]? [1e11 kg]? 1e12 m 1e12 m2 [1e12 m3]? [1e12 kg]? 1e13 m 1e13 m2 [1e13 m3]? [1e13 kg]? 1e14 m 1e14 m2 [1e14 m3]? [1e14 kg]? 1e15 m 1e15 m2 [1e15 m3]? [1e15 kg]? 1e16 m 1e16 m2 [1e16 m3]? [1e16 kg]? 1e17 m 1e17 m2 [1e17 m3]? [1e17 kg]? 1e18 m 1e18 m2 [1e18 m3]? [1e18 kg]? 1e19 m [1e19 m2]? [1e19 m3]? [1e19 kg]? 1e20 m [1e20 m2]? [1e20 m3]? [1e20 kg]? |
:(Moved the table that was here to orders of magnitude --Eob) |
I think it's a good idea and I hate to be the one to nit-pick, but wouldn't your area comparison pages be better as <whatever>km^2; this is more accurate. Also, while you're in a conversiony mood, do you know the conversion for hectares -> km^2? -- Dweir
Actually it turns out that "^" is not a valid character in page titles on this Wiki.
One change I am thinking of is to use scientific notation for the larger sizes (This allows greater range more conveniently, especially useful as I was thinking of extending this idea to other measures such as lengths. For lengths we might want to have sizes all the way from the microscopic to the cosmic scales.) So for example for areas instead of the current:
pages we could haveOr perhaps we should use words rather than numbers:
(Actually, the more I look at the last format the more I like it. The titles are more verbose, but they give a better indication of what the page is, and the format is more in keeping with Wikipedia conventions.)
--Eob
--Zundark, 2001 Nov 19
All though the word version is verbose, in actual links it would be hidden behind a particular area:
--Eob
I think the km2 pages is a great idea, and discovered there are already pages for distances, which, however, use a different notation:
1e3 metres for 1 km - 10 km 1e4 metres for 10 km - 100 km 1e5 metres 1e6 metres 1e7 metres 1e8 metres 1e9 metres 1e10 metres 1e11 metres 1e12 metres 1e13 metres 1e14 metres 1e15 metres 1e16 metres 1e17 metres 1e18 metres 1e19 metres 1e20 metres
In one way, these (metres and km2 pages) are a perfect analogy to the pages for years (1876) and dates (November 20). But they are also quite different. It is almost impossible to find a case where it is natural to link directly to 1e4 metres or 1000km2. It will probably always be [ [ 1e4 metres | 37 km ] ]. With that kind of links, it is not necessary to use "page names" that flow naturally in written prose language (as "November 20" does), and I would seriously suggest a more engineering/scientific like notation with exponentials (1e3, etc.) and unit abbreviations (m rather than metres). We could also use negative exponents to describe the sizes of atoms, etc. The system I proprose is:
I also tried to link distances to areas and volumes, as can be seen in 1e6 metres. I'm not sure I've found a notation that feels natural yet. Please comment on this. --LA2, November 20, 2001