Scientists and physicists estimate the number of atoms in the universe at 10 to the power of 80 — 10 followed by 80 zeros.
During the worst of Zimbabwe’s economic meltdown and hyperinflation, Zimbabwe’s highest money denominations were logged at 10 to the power of 25 — 10 followed by 25 zeros — or the equivalent of nearly one third of the number of atoms estimated in the universe.
h/t Ward
“I don’t think “power of” means what the reporter thinks it does, Alex”.
I don’t know what the percentage is of people that would get this math bit. Log tables are not something I use every day.
I do use imaginary numbers, though. I see them being phased into our world’s economies more and more.
I would say log tables aren’t well-used anymore, but yes, that is a sad bit of basic arithmetic and understanding of how numbers work which is lacking in the article writer.
When I was a math TA, it drove me nuts to see 1st year university students taking calculus do things like:
1/2 + 1/3 = 2/5
in their assignments. And there was always a handful of students who would do just that. One does wonder if basic elementary mathematics is simply not required to graduate from elementary school these days.
Don’t you folks get it? This is why the left has us in such deeeeeeeep doodoo.
I mean by that logic, the multi trillion dollar debt our cousins to the south are suffering under can be paid off in just three easy payments of a few tens of thousands of dollars!
kaga nailed it
2sheds wins the thread
Even if you’re caught off guard with the Scientific Notation, the comment that that’s “1/3 of the total atoms in the universe” should have at least raised some red flags.
I suspect that most people would understand the inaccuracy of the statement if they took time to think about it; but, it seems to me, especially on the Left, most folks today are not looking to think and learn, but to instead be vindicated with respect to their current beliefs on any given subject. It’s all working-out quite nicely if you look from the correct perspective.
IH
“Everyone can get a feel for numbers”
Yes and no, Loki.
There are a surprising number of people who haven’t a clue for basic arithmetic; just watch your local cashier try to make change if the register’s not working and a calculator isn’t available.
A few years ago I taught my 6 & 8yr old sons how to make change in their heads (omigawd – MENTALLY!!!). It’s quite easy when you learn the trick, and I never tired of watching the amazement on cashiers’ faces when my 6-yr old son would quickly chirp how much was owing from a $20 on a $6.18 purchase. People would ask if the kids were “gifted”, and I’d just smile and say, “No, I push them a bit harder in basic math”. Try it sometime; people look at you like you’re einstein.
And this is just basic arithmetic. I bet not 1 in 10 people on average have worked with or understand scientific notation. Of those folks who have some rudimentary knowledge of it, you’ll lose maybe half of them, IMO, if you throw them a curve and ask them to convert some number in scientific notation to engineering notation (if they’ve even heard of that).
The problem lies in our education system, as one would suspect, and the neglect happens at an early age. Kids are taught more about how they should “feel”, or “organize their work” than simple multiplication tables. I asked my one son’s Gr 7 teacher why in g0d’s name they were trying to teach the kids “estimation”, when many of them didn’t know their multiplication tables. And of course, now kids in high school can opt out of math earlier than before. In ontario, gr 13 calculus went the way of blue suede shoes, and pre-university math is much lacking compared to that of the past. Not surprising with the limp-wristed liberal approach to education: the harder the courses, the fewer students who excel and therefore they may not feel “good” about themselves. Bad for the self-esteem, eh?
We are getting further and further behind the curve in the mathematical education of our children. We’ve lagged behind the asians for years; some kids in japan have become so skilled in the use of the soroban (japanese abacus) they are able to do 5/6+ digit multiplication problems in their heads.
As an engineer, it worries me when I see us graduating more and more arts/humanities kids, and fewer techies. While that makes it very handy to find a lawyer on every street corner, or an english or history grad at many a cash register, one wonders where we will be, technologically-speaking, in the next 20-25 years.
mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm
Maybe we could get Walter Pidgeon to explain exponentiation to her?…
Does she mean to infer that she knows how many atoms there are in the universe??
What a maroon!
“It’s perfect if you like puzzles, calculus and things like Rubik’s Cube,” she said.
WTF?
No doubt she is one of the original Valley Girls!
one hundred trillion!!! damn… I need to hit eBay! The bigest one I have is the 1 trillion.
Dan
No Alex, lots of people here got it. And were confident and secure enough to not feel the need to try to belittle others if they didn’t.
Are we making a mountain out of a mole-hill here?
Hint: 6.02 x 10 to the twenty third
I guess that means I earn about 40% of the GDP of Canada. Maybe I’ll buy that new car after all.
I don’t understand the anger directed at Alex, he’s probably more or less right.
Which illustrates the bigger point, i.e. that a lot of people, regardless of political persuasion, are fairly easily misled with math, statistics, physics, etc.
(Cmp e.g. the sloppy CAGW reporting.)
Posted by: Johan i Kanada at January 3, 2011 6:24 AM
Johan, the sum total of Alex’s contributions to SDA amount to no more smug and condescending posts. And, they’re not even clever smug, condescending put downs. He rarely, if ever, adds anything of genuine value to the conversation. He is a troll.
Contrarians are welcomed around these parts, but few actually rise to the level of writing honest, civilized posts. Alex is no exception.
According to Wikipedia,
Number of atoms in a cup of water: approx 2.2 x 10^25.
Number of atoms in the Earth: approx 5.5 x 10^50.
Number of atoms in the Milky Way Galaxy: approx 5 x 10^68.
Number of hydrogen atoms in the observable Universe: approx 3.5 x 10^79.
From http://www.theblaze.com
// In 2007, Scott [Baker] co-founded Breitbart.tv. He served as Chief Operating Officer and co-editor of the site for three years. During that time, Breitbart.tv logged more than 175 million page views on nearly 30,000 hand-crafted news video posts. //
Presumably he will be going on leave to study some basic arithmetic.
It took 40-odd comments on the blaze for someone to notice.
Absinthe,(According to my grade 12 math, it would seem to me that 10 followed by 25 zeros would be 1/3 of 30 followed by 25 zeros. What am I missing.)
I like to try things out with smaller numbers. For example:
3^2 = 9
1/3(9^2) = 27 (not 9)
but (1/3 of 9)^2 WOULD equal 3^2 or 9. (Depends just when you take that third.)
or, to make it even simpler, use the calculator friendly version of scientific notation(letter E represents times ten raised to the power of):
1.0 x E1 = 10
1.0 x E2 = 100
1.0 x E3 = 1000
It is easily seen that the first equation (Answer of 10) is not a third of the last equation (Answer of 1000).
1.0 x E1 = 10 is a third of
3.0 x E1 = 30
Rita. I don’t believe you can choose when to take your 1/3. That is for politicians and economists who specialize in manipulating figures to their advantage.
Absinthe, I totally agree with you. It’s just where you put the punctuation really. A comma in the hands of a wordsmith, or parentheses in the case of an equation, can make all the difference.
?
how much is 10 to the 1st power?
well let me put it this way: can we agree that 10 to the zero is 1?
so logically 10 to the 1st power is 10, right?
so 10 to the 25th power has 25 zeroes, right? so wtf is this about 24 zeroes?
laern to math……
“so 10 to the 25th power has 25 zeroes, right? so wtf is this about 24 zeroes?”
That’s not how they phrased it. They say 10 to the power of 80 is “10 followed by 80 zeros”. It’s actually 1 followed by 80 zeros, or 10 followed by 79 zeros. Either way you look at it, they’re wrong.
“laern to math……”
Learn to English?
You two morans deserve each other.
I don’t know who to side against.
Side with him, please. Both of you.
Mamba, can’t they -both- lose?
Oh yes. Yes they can.
Still, the central point remains, I think, that:
Vitruvius,
Unless I’m missing something, if we are going for a ratio, shouldn’t there be a 1 and a line over x to the (y-z).
For the example 1/(10 to the 55th) , which, if I’m not mistooken is slightly smaller than 1/3.
No. In the sample problem incorrectly calculated by Scott Baker and linked to by Kate supra, x = 10, y = 25, and z = 80 (using the notation from my previous comment), which means that the ratio is 10 to the power of 25 – 80 (= –55) as I correctly noted, or 0.000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 010, and not 25 ÷ 80 (or “nearly one third of”, as Scott contended). The “of” implies that the number of atoms is in the denominator, in order for the correct units to be ZWD per atom, which is what produces the negative exponent in the result.
1 : 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 is a ratio,
0.000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 010 is a number.
Not quite.
0.8 is a number; it’s also the ratio/proportion 4 to 5. Similarly, 2 is a number, and also the ratio of 10 to 5. Et cetera…
Most people have no point of reference for numbers over a billion or trillion; that’s why it’s so dangerous to leave the keys to the treasury in the hands of leftists. This post was Exhibit 1; Exhibit 2: B.H. obama
QED.
mhb23re at gmail d0t calm
I think that ∞²’s FPU is down, MHB 😉
FPU not down … left shift register only works on powers of 2.
I just find it easier to think in terms “ratio” ratios especially if there are more than two things being compared.
Rita, I concede I’m not a wordsmith so when I hear something I try to take the context of the statement. Many years of farming have given me a “bulls**t detecter” good to a radius of 20 miles (or in the case of Suzuki 1200, Gore 2500). The original article was written by an english major who needs his/her 6 year old to confirm the correct change at the local grocer.
buddy, can you square me a dime…
Try a BCD FPU, ∞², they’re great for powers of ten, as was stipulated in the original problem you were assigned. And now let’s stop being silly, shall we, ∞², per Kate’s comment policy. We agree it’s ten to the minus fifty-five or one to ten to the fifty-five, and not twenty-five over or to eighty. We should leave it at that:
“The one hundred trillion Zimbabwe dollar bill, which at 100 followed by 12 zeros is the highest denomination, now sells for $5, depending on its condition.”
and
“During the worst of Zimbabwe’s economic meltdown and hyperinflation, Zimbabwe’s highest money denominations were logged at 10 to the power of 25 — 10 followed by 25 zeros — or the equivalent of nearly one third of the number of atoms estimated in the universe.”
Where did the extra 12 zeros come from?
“Where did the extra 12 zeros come from?”
English major. He drew them forth from his buttocks, obviously. ~:D
Say, isn’t The Blaze the news site created by Glenn Beck? And isn’t Scott Baker his managing editor? Maybe Glenn should hire smarter people.