Re: [Bug-ddrescue] Math and Prefixes

[Chris Keeton]

Ahh, I see. I had no idea that there was a difference in large number notations around the world. It does, however, clarify the reason why scientists use the exponential notations. (Maybe we all should, especially for international programs!)

 

You all have my sincere apologies!! (you know Americans can be very ignorant at times)

 

On 1/18/07, Antonio Diaz Diaz <address@hidden> wrote:

Hello Ariel,

Ariel wrote:
> To me it's obvious that it's 1000*1000^whatever

By that same logic you could invent a new system (the very-short scale?)
using 100*100^whatever. Or even more bizarre ones.

See it this way:
One names small numbers in terms of units. To name the number beyond 9 a
new name is required, ten.

Then one names numbers in terms of number of tens plus the remainder. To
name the number beyond 99 a new name is required, a hundred.

Then one names numbers in terms of number of hundreds plus the remainder
of tens plus the remainder. To name the number beyond 999 a new name is
required, a thousand.

Then one follows with tens of thousands and hundred of thousands, but
beyond 999 999 a new name is required, a million.

Then one follows with tens of millions, hundreds of millions, thousands
of millions, tens of thousands of millions and hundreds of thousands of
millions, but beyond 999 999 999 999 a new name is required, a billion.

Then one follows with tens of billions, hundreds of billions, thousands
of billions, tens of thousands of billions and hundreds of thousands of
billions, but beyond 999 999 999 999 999 999 a new name is required, a
trillion.

And so on.

Billiards and the like are never needed. One may simply use thousand
billions, thousand trillions, etc.

From my point of view, using billion to mean thousand million is pure
laziness. See this quote from the Oxford dictionary
( http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutwords/billion?view=uk):

-------------------------
Once the business world and the financial press found themselves
discussing `thousand millions' so much, the 'American' system simply
became more convenient, despite a certain lack of logical tidiness. (A
'British' trillion is the third power of a million, while the 'American'
one is the fourth power of a thousand, and the 'American' system
continues out of sync with the arithmetic).
-------------------------


> But, back to the subject at hand since we are talking about computers
> here, can't you just use K, M, G?

If I use k to mean 1024, what may I use to mean 1000? It is not
impossible that in the future the sector size of some devices don't be a
power of 2.


Regards,
Antonio.