Writing 0.012 Micrometers With All The Zeros | Free Math Help Forum

• Home
• Forums New posts Search forums
• What's new New posts Latest activity

Log in Register What's new Search

Search

Everywhere Threads This forum This thread Search titles only By: Search Advanced search…

• New posts
• Search forums

Menu Log in Register Install the app Install

• Forums
• Free Math Help
• Arithmetic

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.You should upgrade or use an alternative browser. writing 0.012 micrometers with all the zeros

• Thread starter Kenneth Logan
• Start date May 27, 2020

K

Kenneth Logan

New member

Joined May 27, 2020 Messages 6 There are actually 3 questions here all related and being 65 I have forgotten most of my math. Um / micrometer / micron is 1000 times smaller than a meter, 1.0 meter, 0.000001 Micron? so if something is 0.012 microns, then it's almost not quite 100 times smaller than a micron and could be written 0.00000012 ? So if something was 3 microns then 0.012 microns would be almost 300% smaller ? I was trying to figure out how much smaller 0.012 microns was than 3 microns and also trying to figure how to correctly write with all the zeros, because I thought maybe I could understand it better if I could just see the difference in zeros. Thank you R

raquelc

New member

Joined Apr 30, 2020 Messages 49 In fact, a micrometer is 1000000 times smaller than a meter. That means that the number of metres needs to be MULTIPLIED by 1000000 (we have 1000000 micrometers in 1m) If we have to give micrometers in meters, then we divide by 1000000, so 1 micrometer is 0.000001 meters (we move the dot 6 spaces to the left) If we had 0.02 micrometers, to get it into meters, we divide by 1000000 (6 zeros means we move the decimal point 6 spaces to the left) so 0.02 micrometers are 0.00000002 meters R

raquelc

New member

Joined Apr 30, 2020 Messages 49 If you want to know how much smaller 0.012 is from 3, you could look at how many 0.012 you need to arrive to 3 (0.012*x=3...what will be x?) a times b is c means that b must be c divided by a K

Kenneth Logan

New member

Joined May 27, 2020 Messages 6 It's 4am here but I think I get what you are trying to teach me, and I may have not correctly stated what I am looking for, but I think I understand the formula. So lets go back to the micrometer something that is 3 micrometers is written 0.0000003. ? I might be misunderstand the material I was studying. I was looking at the size of the COVID virus and it said 0.012 microns and I took that to mean it was 0.012 smaller than 1 micron, was I reading that correctly. Lets just start there. R

raquelc

New member

Joined Apr 30, 2020 Messages 49

Kenneth Logan said: It's 4am here but I think I get what you are trying to teach me, and I may have not correctly stated what I am looking for, but I think I understand the formula. So lets go back to the micrometer something that is 3 micrometers is written 0.0000003. ? I might be misunderstand the material I was studying. I was looking at the size of the COVID virus and it said 0.012 microns and I took that to mean it was 0.012 smaller than 1 micron, was I reading that correctly. Lets just start there. Click to expand...

3 is the same than 3.0, if we divide by 1000000(6 zeros) we move the decimal point 6 spaces to the left. 3 micrometers is 0.000003meters. 0.012 times 250 give us 3, therefore 0.012 is 250 times smaller than 3. However, you may want to double check that information, as I believe it is between 120-160nm, that is 0.12-0.16 micrometers what is at most 25 times smaller than 3 micrometers. Still super tiny ...if 1 km would represent a millimeter, those 0.12micrometers would not arrive to be represented by 1mm D

Deleted member 4993

Guest

Kenneth Logan said: It's 4am here but I think I get what you are trying to teach me, and I may have not correctly stated what I am looking for, but I think I understand the formula. So lets go back to the micrometer something that is 3 micrometers is written 0.0000003. ? I might be misunderstand the material I was studying. I was looking at the size of the COVID virus and it said 0.012 microns and I took that to mean it was 0.012 smaller than 1 micron, was I reading that correctly. Lets just start there. Click to expand...

If somebody is 2 meter tall - that means the height of that person is 2 times as tall as a meter stick (it is NOT 2 times taller than a meter stick).​ There is a strict difference between terms "as tall" and "taller". K

Kenneth Logan

New member

Joined May 27, 2020 Messages 6 Thank you I get it, and I will go back and recheck the wording on that. I was looking for 3M N95 mask as I am 65, and I looked up a PDF doc from 3M. These masks are hard to find and way more expensive than in normal times when you do find them. The PDF said the mask was capable of stopping something as small as 3 microns and I looked at the virus and though gee the mask might stop some of the virus but really this thing is so small it just seems to me to be sort of worthless. Not asking for comment on weather the mask is worth it, that is not what this forum is about but you did help gain a better under standing of 3 microns compared to 0.012 microns and it might even be smaller, I guess something is better than nothing but I am certainly not considering surgical mask or bandanna. Thanks for the help I have realized I have lost a lot of skill at doing math and am considering studying on line to refresh what I use to know how to do. D

Deleted member 4993

Guest

Kenneth Logan said: Thank you I get it, and I will go back and recheck the wording on that. I was looking for 3M N95 mask as I am 65, and I looked up a PDF doc from 3M. These masks are hard to find and way more expensive than in normal times when you do find them. The PDF said the mask was capable of stopping something as small as 3 microns and I looked at the virus and though gee the mask might stop some of the virus but really this thing is so small it just seems to me to be sort of worthless. Not asking for comment on weather the mask is worth it, that is not what this forum is about but you did help gain a better under standing of 3 microns compared to 0.012 microns and it might even be smaller, I guess something is better than nothing but I am certainly not considering surgical mask or bandanna. Thanks for the help I have realized I have lost a lot of skill at doing math and am considering studying on line to refresh what I use to know how to do. Click to expand...

The mask does NOT help you from "getting infected". It helps you from SPREADING (in case you were asymptotically infected) your infection to other, by stopping the spit-balls produced by you as you talk. Mask is a symbol that shows that you care for well-being of others. The mask is worth it - as it stops the spread at least from one source. H

HallsofIvy

Elite Member

Joined Jan 27, 2012 Messages 7,760 "Mask", not "musk"! D

Deleted member 4993

Guest

HallsofIvy said: "Mask", not "musk"! Click to expand...

Thanks - too much dependence on spell-check (when there is no spelling mistake!!) - fixed it. K

Kenneth Logan

New member

Joined May 27, 2020 Messages 6 Some where I wrote musk, I am not a great with typing, I try to check what I write some times I miss things, what is more important ... I think I miss read the PDF from 3M we are talking about math things here , here is the actual paragraph from 3M on the N95 mask: "Q. How is an N95 respirator different from a medical, surgical, or patient care mask? A. N95 respirators help reduce the wearer’s inhalation exposure to certain airborne particulates. These respirator filters have been tested and certified by NIOSH to be at least 95% efficient when tested against very “small” particles that are the most difficult size to filter (approximately 0.3 microns). " I originally read it as 3 micrometers wrong it's .3 of a micrometer so 3 10th's of a single micro meter? Still the virus is 0.012 nanometers so the mask still is incapable of stopping a person from breathing in the virus. In other words the virus can still pass through the mask? Most people don't have a 3M N95 mask, they have surgical mask and I am seeing more and more bandannas across the face. None of these can stop a particle that is as small as a nanometer. So in my original statement I was talking about 3 micrometers but I think I read it wrong it's 0.3 micrometers and that is 3 10th's of a single micro meter? I just want want to have the math correct, the forum is about math, not whether you should wear a mask or not that would be off topic. so even if the N95 can stop something a small as 3 tenths of a single micro meter, something as small as 0.012 nanometers could pass through? D

Deleted member 4993

Guest

Kenneth Logan said: Some where I wrote musk, I am not a great with typing, I try to check what I write some times I miss things, what is more important ... I think I miss read the PDF from 3M we are talking about math things here , here is the actual paragraph from 3M on the N95 mask: "Q. How is an N95 respirator different from a medical, surgical, or patient care mask? A. N95 respirators help reduce the wearer’s inhalation exposure to certain airborne particulates. These respirator filters have been tested and certified by NIOSH to be at least 95% efficient when tested against very “small” particles that are the most difficult size to filter (approximately 0.3 microns). " I originally read it as 3 micrometers wrong it's .3 of a micrometer so 3 10th's of a single micro meter? Still the virus is 0.012 nanometers so the mask still is incapable of stopping a person from breathing in the virus. In other words the virus can still pass through the mask? Most people don't have a 3M N95 mask, they have surgical mask and I am seeing more and more bandannas across the face. None of these can stop a particle that is as small as a nanometer. So in my original statement I was talking about 3 micrometers but I think I read it wrong it's 0.3 micrometers and that is 3 10th's of a single micro meter? I just want want to have the math correct, the forum is about math, not whether you should wear a mask or not that would be off topic. so even if the N95 can stop something a small as 3 tenths of a single micro meter, something as small as 0.012 nanometers could pass through? Click to expand...

Again - wearing mask is NOT for protecting the wearer directly (or immediately). The mask stops the spitballs from the wearer - and protects others around the wearer. K

Kenneth Logan

New member

Joined May 27, 2020 Messages 6 again I am not talking about whether a mask is right or wrong, I am talking about the math 0.3 microns is actually 3 tenths of a micron, that is what I am asking the forum is about math so if you have an particle that is 0.012 nanometers how much smaller is that than 3 10th's of a micrometer because I don't really understand how to do that math. I micrometer is 6 0's, I think a nanometer would be 9 0's . What is the proper math to figure out how much smaller is one thing from another. It would be improper to discuss anything in this forum that is not math. Nanometers are 100 smaller than micrometers, my problem is 3 tenths of a micro meter. How do I figure the difference between in size between 3 tenths of a micrometer and 0.012 nanometers? maybe some could explain or give me the equation for figuring the difference between .3 meters and 0.012 micrometers. I know that if you multiply 0.012 X 250 you get 3. I get that if you divide 3 by 0.012 you get 250. Where I get confused is once we go into decimals. if I divide 0.3 by 0.012 I get 25, but what is that 25 telling me. The point .3 I am talking about is 3 tenths of 0.000001. I can't rap my thought around that. I struggle with numbers that go right instead of left. So if a micrometer is 0.0000001 then 3 tenths of that is 0.0000001/10 x3 I realize this must be the moron way of getting there, but would that would be correct 0.00000003, that's three tenths of a micron? Then I need to understand when it says 0.012 nanometers; nanometers have 9 0's so if it says something is .012 nanometers and there are 9 places in nanometers it is really written as 0.000000012? and if I want to know how smaller that is than 3 tenths of a micrometer then I would divide 0.00000003 by 0.000000012 and yes I understand that all the zeros cancel out and then that would mean .3/.12 and that gives me 2.5 times smaller ... I struggle with this stuff, but I am trying to think my way through it. K

Kenneth Logan

New member

Joined May 27, 2020 Messages 6 About the mask thing, there are videos that show the difference of exhaled repository water droplets, that's water droplets. Which are 1 micron to 10 microns, but we are talking about a virus that is nanometers. My brother argues that a mask if it stops 50% of then it is better than nothing. I argue it only takes 1 tiny COVID-19 to infect, kind of like facing a firing squad you have 100 guns pointed at you but only 50% have real bullets what do you think your chance is, masks are useless. But the math of trying to understand 3 tenths of a micrometer vs 0.012 nanometer, I wanted to understand that, and that is why I came to a math forum. I have lots of other math questions but they should not be asked in this forum, I am very excited I found the forum and I am looking forward to learning much more. An opinion is just that, just what one thinks, but math as far as I know is an absolute.

Dr.Peterson

Elite Member

Joined Nov 12, 2017 Messages 16,869

Kenneth Logan said: I am talking about the math 0.3 microns is actually 3 tenths of a micron, that is what I am asking the forum is about math so if you have an particle that is 0.012 nanometers how much smaller is that than 3 10th's of a micrometer because I don't really understand how to do that math. I micrometer is 6 0's, I think a nanometer would be 9 0's . What is the proper math to figure out how much smaller is one thing from another. It would be improper to discuss anything in this forum that is not math. Nanometers are 100 smaller than micrometers, my problem is 3 tenths of a micro meter. How do I figure the difference between in size between 3 tenths of a micrometer and 0.012 nanometers? maybe some could explain or give me the equation for figuring the difference between .3 meters and 0.012 micrometers. I know that if you multiply 0.012 X 250 you get 3. I get that if you divide 3 by 0.012 you get 250. Where I get confused is once we go into decimals. if I divide 0.3 by 0.012 I get 25, but what is that 25 telling me. The point .3 I am talking about is 3 tenths of 0.000001. I can't rap my thought around that. I struggle with numbers that go right instead of left. So if a micrometer is 0.0000001 then 3 tenths of that is 0.0000001/10 x3 I realize this must be the moron way of getting there, but would that would be correct 0.00000003, that's three tenths of a micron? Then I need to understand when it says 0.012 nanometers; nanometers have 9 0's so if it says something is .012 nanometers and there are 9 places in nanometers it is really written as 0.000000012? and if I want to know how smaller that is than 3 tenths of a micrometer then I would divide 0.00000003 by 0.000000012 and yes I understand that all the zeros cancel out and then that would mean .3/.12 and that gives me 2.5 times smaller ... I struggle with this stuff, but I am trying to think my way through it. Click to expand...

Rather than count zeros, you should focus on the location of the decimal point relative to the end of the number. One micrometer has 5 0's before the 1 (0.000 001), and 11 micrometers has 4 0's (0.000 011). (Spaces help in counting.) The way I think of it, micro means millionth, so 1 micrometer is 1/1,000,000 m; if we move the decimal place in both numerator and denominator 6 places to the left (the number of 0's in 1,000,000), we get 0.000 001/1.000000 = 0.000 001. A nanometer is 1/1000 of a micrometer (not 100). For that, you move the decimal point 9 places: 1/1,000,000,000 = 0.000 000 001. So 0.3 micrometer is 0.000 000 3 m, and 0.012 micrometer is 0.000 000 012, where we have 6 zeros tacked on to the left of the number of micrometers. But since the units are the same, the ratio of these is just the ratio of 0.3 to 0.012: 0.3/0.012 = 25, which says that 0.3 um is 25 times 0.012 µm, and 0.012 µm is 1/25 of 0.3 µm. While you should be asking science questions of scientists, I want to make a couple comments about the droplet issue, based on things I have heard from good sources.

Kenneth Logan said: About the mask thing, there are videos that show the difference of exhaled repository water droplets, that's water droplets. Which are 1 micron to 10 microns, but we are talking about a virus that is nanometers. My brother argues that a mask if it stops 50% of then it is better than nothing. I argue it only takes 1 tiny COVID-19 to infect, kind of like facing a firing squad you have 100 guns pointed at you but only 50% have real bullets what do you think your chance is, masks are useless. But the math of trying to understand 3 tenths of a micrometer vs 0.012 nanometer, I wanted to understand that, and that is why I came to a math forum. I have lots of other math questions but they should not be asked in this forum, I am very excited I found the forum and I am looking forward to learning much more. An opinion is just that, just what one thinks, but math as far as I know is an absolute. Click to expand...

First, it turns out that the 0.3 micron size is used as a standard at least in part because that is the hardest size to stop; somehow (I think it involves electrostatic attraction, or just more random movement), smaller particles are actually easier to stop! In fact, your quote in post #11 said this: "when tested against very 'small' particles that are the most difficult size to filter (approximately 0.3 microns)." I just did a quick search for good sources for this, and here are the first two I found, which are not necessarily the best, but come from reliable sources:

COMMENTARY: Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data

www.cidrap.umn.edu Every filter has a particle size range that it collects inefficiently. Above and below this range, particles will be collected with greater efficiency. For fibrous non-electret filters, this size is about 0.3 micrometers (µm); for electret filters, it ranges from 0.06 to 0.1 µm. When testing, we care most about the point of inefficiency. As flow increases, particles in this range will be collected less efficiently.​ https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.0c03252 We made measurements for three variations: combining one layer 600 TPI cotton with two layers of silk, two layers of chiffon, and one layer of flannel. The results are also compared with the performance of a standard N95 mask. All three hybrid combinations performed well, exceeding 80% efficiency in the <300 nm range, and >90% in the >300 nm range. These cloth hybrids are slightly inferior to the N95 mask above 300 nm, but superior for particles smaller than 300 nm.​ The second reference says that cloth masks (properly designed) work better than N95 for the smallest sizes; and 300 nm (which is the same as 0.3 µm) is that least efficient point they are basing their study on. Second, I have heard good people say that quantity matters; a single virus is far less likely to cause infection than a thousand of them. For the reason, you'll have to ask the scientists. But here is one reference:

The Risks - Know Them - Avoid Them

Please read this link to learn about the author and background to these posts. It seems many people are breathing some relief, and I’m not sure why. An epidemic curve has a relatively predictable upslope and once the peak is reached, the back slope can also be predicted. We have robust data from... www.erinbromage.com In order to get infected you need to get exposed to an infectious dose of the virus; based on infectious dose studies with other coronaviruses, it appears that only small doses may be needed for infection to take hold. Some experts estimate that as few as 1000 SARS-CoV2 infectious viral particles are all that will be needed (ref 1, ref 2). Please note, this still needs to be determined experimentally, but we can use that number to demonstrate how infection can occur. Infection could occur, through 1000 infectious viral particles you receive in one breath or from one eye-rub, or 100 viral particles inhaled with each breath over 10 breaths, or 10 viral particles with 100 breaths. Each of these situations can lead to an infection.​ Not entirely encouraging, but the point is that we need to both reduce the rate at which particles come at us, and the length of time we are exposed. Masks are far from perfect, but can help keep you from infecting others (and their masks can help keep them from infecting you). Isolation is better. I myself am not terrified, but am cautious. Edit: Just after I sent that, my wife passed me this article on mask usage:

What's the deal with Masks?

Masks should not be a political issue. They are a public health issue. But they seem to have stirred up a whole mess of fuss for various reasons. I hope I can break it down simply here and demonstrate their importance in reducing SARS-CoV2 infections in our communities. When we breathe, talk... www.erinbromage.com But, again, I'm not an expert, so I'm saying this only to suggest possibilities. Last edited: Jun 2, 2020 You must log in or register to reply here. Share: Facebook X (Twitter) Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email Share Link

• Forums
• Free Math Help
• Arithmetic

• This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register. By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. Accept Learn more…

Top