this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
549 points (96.0% liked)
Technology
59467 readers
4271 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
41.5 petameters.
Nobody using the metric system says "trillion kilometers"! 🌞
He literally told it to give the answer "in km". That's on him, not Bing.
https://coco1453.wordpress.com/thinking-in-metric-for-astronomy/
Unfortunately way too many people do even though it is not the correct SI unit for the scale, simply because 'kilometer' is the metric distance unit used for Earth distances. I have astronomy distances memorized as metric SI distances and I only care about the km distance so I can convert that to the SI distance. e.g. When I see "trillion kilometers" I convert that in my head to "quadrillion meters" which I then convert to "petameters".
I would rather see the base unit 'meters' than km so I can skip a step. My own preference for astronomy distance units is:
metric SI units > meters > kilometers > non metric units
Hmm now that I read that article I was thinking about the poor computers who all run on power of 2. What we really should do is switch to base 1024 instead. It makes sense to optimize for the true representation of numbers in these spacecraft.
36.86 pebimeters. Lets make it happen! 🤣