I know this sounds like a trivial thing. 1027 is so large why would there ever be a need for that number. Well as it happens 5.9*1027g is the mass of the earth.

That said I've seen 2 proposals.

Hella and xera. However the former has no prominence and the latter, I cant find anything for. I was thinking ennéa is more appropriate given it is Greek for 9 and yotta is Greek for 8, zetta 7, exa 6. . . It all so fits the same sort of sound pattern.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_numbers

"Octillion", "Quadrilliard", "Ennillion".

Take your pick! Seems that the American standard name is in common enough usage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_ ... rs%29#1027

Says that 1027 is also the number of atoms in the human body and the number of unique hand combinations in Texas Hold 'Em.

OK to be more precise we need a prefix.
5.9 Quadrilliard grams is kinda wordy.

lucek wrote:OK to be more precise we need a prefix.
5.9 Quadrilliard grams is kinda wordy.

I don't really see how "5.9 Million grams" is vastly different to "5.9 Octillion grams".* Two letters?

*Comparing the two terms from the standard American system.

Edit: List of prefixes here:

http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~alopez-o/ma ... ode54.html

"nea" does the equivalent job as "mega", so 1027 grams would be one neagram.

Thommo wrote:

lucek wrote:OK to be more precise we need a prefix.
5.9 Quadrilliard grams is kinda wordy.

I don't really see how "5.9 Million grams" is vastly different to "5.9 Octillion grams".* Two letters?

*Comparing the two terms from the standard American system.

It's not Million grams vs. Octillion grams. it's Million grams vs. megagrams. So if we had a prefix we could say 5.9 ennéagrams, or 5.9 hellagrams.

lucek wrote:It's not Million grams vs. Octillion grams. it's Million grams vs. megagrams. So if we had a prefix we could say 5.9 ennéagrams, or 5.9 hellagrams.

I addressed this already.

Million <-> Octillion
Mega <-> Nea

Should cover it, don't you think?

Thommo wrote:

lucek wrote:It's not Million grams vs. Octillion grams. it's Million grams vs. megagrams. So if we had a prefix we could say 5.9 ennéagrams, or 5.9 hellagrams.

I addressed this already.

Million <-> Octillion
Mega <-> Nea

Should cover it, don't you think?

Yeah editing dose cause problems like this. Good rule of thumb before you post an edit check to see if someone has replied to the unedited form, or at least check that your not calling someone on information you covered in the edit.

lucek wrote:Yeah editing dose cause problems like this. Good rule of thumb before you post an edit check to see if someone has replied to the unedited form, or at least check that your not calling someone on information you covered in the edit.

I edited it 6 minutes before you replied. But thanks for the tip!

I will continue the trend with the following tip, before one posts a reply one can click "preview", or reload the thread in a new tab to view any new posts or corrections.

Still, no harm done, I didn't really mind repeating the sentence and I don't think the thread reads ambiguously now!

Harpo.

lucek wrote:I know this sounds like a trivial thing. 1027 is so large why would there ever be a need for that number. Well as it happens 5.9*1027g is the mass of the earth.

That said I've seen 2 proposals.

Hella and xera. However the former has no prominence and the latter, I cant find anything for. I was thinking ennéa is more appropriate given it is Greek for 9 and yotta is Greek for 8, zetta 7, exa 6. . . It all so fits the same sort of sound pattern.

Is 1027 important in any other way. If not, why not just have have 5.9*1027g = 1 Terra or Gaia or something?

Thommo wrote:Million <-> Octillion
Mega <-> Nea

Should cover it, don't you think?

We still don't have a standard but this should suffice till SI makes up it's collective minds.

Audley Strange wrote:Is 1027 important in any other way. If not, why not just have have 5.9*1027g = 1 Terra or Gaia or something?

Tera is already 1012

An alternative name for a megagram is a 'metric ton', btw. As far as the matter in question is concerned, if the scientific community hasn't already chosen such a prefix (I'm surprised), it probably will soon.