Metric Prefix Help - Find 2mL=200L

[Nerdydude101]

I keep trying to find a certain metric prefix but i can't seem to find it, i need to know what prefix makes 2mL into 200_L i believe it is 10^-5 but i can't find that on any charts. Any help is much appreciated!

 

[SteamKing]

I keep trying to find a certain metric prefix but i can't seem to find it, i need to know what prefix makes 2mL into 200_L i believe it is 10^-5 but i can't find that on any charts. Any help is much appreciated!

It's not clear what you are looking for.

2 mL = 2 milliliters = 0.002 L

the prefix here is 'milli', which means 1/1000.

200 L = 2 hectoliters

the prefix here is 'hecto', which means 100.

In both cases, the base unit is the liter.

It would be meaningless to say 1 MmL, or 1 Mega-milli-liter, which would equal

10^6 * 10^(-3) = 1000 Liters

 

[chrisbradysr]

Basically he's asking...
If 10^-2 meters is a centimeter and 10^-3 is a millimeter then what is 10^-5 meters.
What I found is centimilli is the prefix before micro and decimilli precedes that

 

[SteamKing]

10^-5 m = 10 micrometers.

It's not allowed to combine multiple prefixes together. 'centimilli' and 'decimilli' are not recognized by SI:

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

See the sections on Base Units and Prefix

 

[chrisbradysr]

Micro is 10^-6

http://www.chemteam.info/Metric/Metric-Prefixes.html

http://chemistry.berkeley.edu/links/weights/metric_prefixes_chart.gif

The URL for the image says it's from Berkeley for what ever that is worth

 

[SteamKing]

They do a lot of weird things at Berkeley.

http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si_brochure_8_en.pdf

On p. 122 of the document above, compound prefixes are expressly prohibited.

I looked at your link but could not find the table reproduced in Post #5. Perhaps someone hacked the page, which has now been fixed.

 

[dauto]

That prefix doesn't exist. That table from Berkley is unorthodox.

 

[dauto]

I went to the page but didn't see any of the unorthodox prefixes.

 

[Borek]

That's because the table is given here: http://chemistry.berkeley.edu/links/weights/metric.php

(Not that I am saying it is correct, just clarifying what the chrisbradysr was talking about).

 

[SteamKing]

It just goes to show that anyone can post anything on the Internet.

Anywho, we should be past appeals to authority in this case. Combined prefixes are not allowed in SI, period, and Berkeley is doing their students a disservice when teaching them SI with unconventional prefixes, IMO.

 

[chrisbradysr]

I just simply gave a prefix for what he asked. I never said it was universally accepted. Which is why below I said "for what ever it's worth"

 

[SteamKing]

I just simply gave a prefix for what he asked. I never said it was universally accepted. Which is why below I said "for what ever it's worth"

That's why at PF we like to point out these things in our replies, because there are some members who, as students, may not realize that something is not universally accepted. On occasion, we get people trying to disseminate certain ideas (like perpetual motion) and other crackpottery, which is against forum rules.

Now, I can't say what passes for science in the august halls of Berkeley, but I am surprised that such clearly non-standard applications of the SI unit convention are apparently so current that they have crept into the website of the Chemistry Department there.

 

[256bits]

Well, they ( Berkeley ) do say it is metric, with no mention of it being as accepted SI.

The pdf, though, continues to also say that cc is not the accepted way to write a unit of volume, but that has been around for ages.

I guess their ( the pdf ) main concern is to have anything written to be void of confusion. Is a centimilli necessary. It is confusing just by looking at it.

 

[Vanadium 50]

SI and metric are two different things (for example, the hectare is metric but is not SI), and the author did specify "metric".

 

[SteamKing]

SI and metric are two different things (for example, the hectare is metric but is not SI), and the author did specify "metric".

IIRC, the OP wanted to know what 'prefix' made 2 mL into 200_L, whatever that means, so it's not clear if that distinction is significant to the poster.