Hubbry Logo
Names of large numbersNames of large numbersMain
Open search
Names of large numbers
Community hub
Names of large numbers
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Names of large numbers
Names of large numbers
from Wikipedia

Depending on context (e.g. language, culture, region), some large numbers have names that allow for describing large quantities in a textual form; not mathematical. For very large values, the text is generally shorter than a decimal numeric representation although longer than scientific notation.

Two naming scales for large numbers have been used in English and other European languages since the early modern era: the long and short scales. Most English variants use the short scale today, but the long scale remains dominant in many non-English-speaking areas, including continental Europe and Spanish-speaking countries in the Americas. These naming procedures are based on taking the number n occurring in 103n+3 (short scale) or 106n (long scale) and concatenating Latin roots for its units, tens, and hundreds place, together with the suffix -illion.

Names of numbers above a trillion are rarely used in practice; such large numbers have practical usage primarily in the scientific domain, where powers of ten are expressed as 10 with a numeric superscript. However, these somewhat rare names are considered acceptable for approximate statements. For example, the statement "There are approximately 7.1 octillion atoms in an adult human body" is understood to be in short scale of the table below (and is only accurate if referring to short scale rather than long scale).

The Indian numbering system uses the named numbers common between the long and short scales up to ten thousand. For larger values, it includes named numbers at each multiple of 100; including lakh (105) and crore (107).[1]

English also has words, such as zillion, that are used informally to mean large but unspecified amounts.

Standard dictionary numbers

[edit]
x Name
(SS/LS, LS)
SS
(103x+3)
LS
(106x, 106x+3)
Authorities
AHD4[2] CED[3] COD[4] MW[5] OED[6][7] RHD2[8] SOED3[9] W3[10] HM[11]
1 million 106 106
milliard 109
2 billion 109 1012
3 trillion 1012 1018
4 quadrillion 1015 1024
5 quintillion 1018 1030
6 sextillion 1021 1036
7 septillion 1024 1042
8 octillion 1027 1048
9 nonillion 1030 1054
10 decillion 1033 1060
11 undecillion 1036 1066
12 duodecillion 1039 1072
13 tredecillion 1042 1078
14 quattuordecillion 1045 1084
15 quindecillion 1048 1090
16 sexdecillion 1051 1096
17 septendecillion 1054 10102
18 octodecillion 1057 10108
19 novemdecillion 1060 10114
20 vigintillion 1063 10120
100 centillion 10303 10600

Usage:

Apart from million, the words in this list ending with -illion are all derived by adding prefixes (bi-, tri-, etc., derived from Latin) to the stem -illion.[12] Centillion[13] appears to be the highest name ending in -illion that is included in these dictionaries. Trigintillion, often cited as a word in discussions of names of large numbers, is not included in any of them, nor are any of the names that can easily be created by extending the naming pattern (unvigintillion, duovigintillion, duo­quinqua­gint­illion, etc.).

Name Value Authorities
AHD4[2] CED[3] COD[4] MW[5] OED[6][7] RHD2[8] SOED3[9] W3[10] HM[11]
googol 10100
googolplex 10googol (1010100)

All of the dictionaries included googol and googolplex, generally crediting it to the Kasner and Newman book and to Kasner's nephew (see below). None include any higher names in the googol family (googolduplex, etc.). The Oxford English Dictionary comments that googol and googolplex are "not in formal mathematical use".

Usage of names of large numbers

[edit]

Some names of large numbers, such as million, billion, and trillion, have real referents in human experience, and are encountered in many contexts, particularly in finance and economics. At times, the names of large numbers have been forced into common usage as a result of hyperinflation. The highest numerical value banknote ever printed was a note for 1 sextillion pengő (1021 or 1 milliard bilpengő as printed) printed in Hungary in 1946. In 2009, Zimbabwe printed a 100 trillion (1014) Zimbabwean dollar note, which at the time of printing was worth about US$30.[14] In global economics, the name of a significantly larger number was used in 2024, when the Russian news outlet RBK stated that the sum of legal claims against Google in Russia totalled 2 undecillion (2×1036) rubles, or US$20 decillion (US $2×1034); a value worth more than all financial assets in the world combined.[15] A Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, stated that this value was symbolic.[16]

Names of larger numbers, however, have a tenuous, artificial existence, rarely found outside definitions, lists, and discussions of how large numbers are named. Even well-established names like sextillion are rarely used, since in the context of science, including astronomy, where such large numbers often occur, they are nearly always written using scientific notation. In this notation, powers of ten are expressed as 10 with a numeric superscript, e.g. "The X-ray emission of the radio galaxy is 1.3×1045 joules." When a number such as 1045 needs to be referred to in words, it is simply read out as "ten to the forty-fifth" or "ten to the forty-five". This is easier to say and less ambiguous than "quattuordecillion", which means something different in the long scale and the short scale.

When a number represents a quantity rather than a count, SI prefixes can be used—thus "femtosecond", not "one quadrillionth of a second"—although often powers of ten are used instead of some of the very high and very low prefixes. In some cases, specialized units are used, such as the astronomer's parsec and light year or the particle physicist's barn.

Nevertheless, large numbers have an intellectual fascination and are of mathematical interest, and giving them names is one way people try to conceptualize and understand them.

One of the earliest examples of this is The Sand Reckoner, in which Archimedes gave a system for naming large numbers. To do this, he called the numbers up to a myriad myriad (108) "first numbers" and called 108 itself the "unit of the second numbers". Multiples of this unit then became the second numbers, up to this unit taken a myriad myriad times, 108·108=1016. This became the "unit of the third numbers", whose multiples were the third numbers, and so on. Archimedes continued naming numbers in this way up to a myriad myriad times the unit of the 108-th numbers, i.e. and embedded this construction within another copy of itself to produce names for numbers up to Archimedes then estimated the number of grains of sand that would be required to fill the known universe, and found that it was no more than "one thousand myriad of the eighth numbers" (1063).

Origins of the "standard dictionary numbers"

[edit]

The words bymillion and trimillion were first recorded in 1475 in a manuscript of Jehan Adam. Subsequently, Nicolas Chuquet wrote a book Triparty en la science des nombres which was not published during Chuquet's lifetime. However, most of it was copied by Estienne de La Roche for a portion of his 1520 book, L'arismetique. Chuquet's book contains a passage in which he shows a large number marked off into groups of six digits, with the comment:

Ou qui veult le premier point peult signiffier million Le second point byllion Le tiers point tryllion Le quart quadrillion Le cinqe quyllion Le sixe sixlion Le sept.e septyllion Le huyte ottyllion Le neufe nonyllion et ainsi des ault's se plus oultre on vouloit preceder

(Or if you prefer the first mark can signify million, the second mark byllion, the third mark tryllion, the fourth quadrillion, the fifth quyillion, the sixth sixlion, the seventh septyllion, the eighth ottyllion, the ninth nonyllion and so on with others as far as you wish to go).

Adam and Chuquet used the long scale of powers of a million; that is, Adam's bymillion (Chuquet's byllion) denoted 1012, and Adam's trimillion (Chuquet's tryllion) denoted 1018.

Googol family

[edit]

The names googol and googolplex were invented by Edward Kasner's nephew Milton Sirotta and introduced in Kasner and Newman's 1940 book Mathematics and the Imagination[17] in the following passage:

The name "googol" was invented by a child (Dr. Kasner's nine-year-old nephew) who was asked to think up a name for a very big number, namely 1 with one hundred zeroes after it. He was very certain that this number was not infinite, and therefore equally certain that it had to have a name. At the same time that he suggested "googol" he gave a name for a still larger number: "googolplex". A googolplex is much larger than a googol, but is still finite, as the inventor of the name was quick to point out. It was first suggested that a googolplex should be 1, followed by writing zeros until you got tired. This is a description of what would happen if one tried to write a googolplex, but different people get tired at different times and it would never do to have Carnera a better mathematician than Dr. Einstein, simply because he had more endurance. The googolplex is, then, a specific finite number, equal to 1 with a googol zeros after it.

Value Name Authority
10100 googol Kasner and Newman, dictionaries (see above)
10googol = 1010100 googolplex Kasner and Newman, dictionaries (see above)

John Horton Conway and Richard K. Guy[18] have suggested that N-plex be used as a name for 10N. This gives rise to the name googolplexplex for 10googolplex = 101010100. Conway and Guy[18] have proposed that N-minex be used as a name for 10N, giving rise to the name googolminex for the reciprocal of a googolplex, which is written as 10−(10100). None of these names are in wide use.

The names googol and googolplex inspired the name of the Internet company Google and its corporate headquarters, the Googleplex, respectively.[19]

Extensions of the standard dictionary numbers

[edit]

This section illustrates several systems for naming large numbers, and shows how they can be extended past vigintillion.

Traditional British usage assigned new names for each power of one million (the long scale): 1,000,000 = 1 million; 1,000,0002 = 1 billion; 1,000,0003 = 1 trillion; and so on. It was adapted from French usage, and is similar to the system that was documented or invented by Chuquet.

Traditional American usage (which was also adapted from French usage but at a later date), Canadian, and modern British usage assign new names for each power of one thousand (the short scale). Thus, a billion is 1000 × 10002 = 109; a trillion is 1000 × 10003 = 1012; and so forth. Due to its dominance in the financial world (along with the US dollar), this was adopted for official United Nations documents.

Traditional French usage has varied; in 1948, France, which had originally popularized the short scale worldwide, reverted to the long scale.

The term milliard is unambiguous and always means 109. It is seldom seen in American usage and rarely in British usage, but frequently in continental European usage. The term is sometimes attributed to French mathematician Jacques Peletier du Mans c. 1550 (for this reason, the long scale is also known as the Chuquet-Peletier system), but the Oxford English Dictionary states that the term derives from post-Classical Latin term milliartum, which became milliare and then milliart and finally our modern term.

Concerning names ending in -illiard for numbers 106n+3, milliard is certainly in widespread use in languages other than English, but the degree of actual use of the larger terms is questionable. The terms "milliardo" in Italian, "Milliarde" in German, "miljard" in Dutch, "milyar" in Turkish, and "миллиард", milliard (transliterated) in Russian, are standard usage when discussing financial topics.

The naming procedure for large numbers is based on taking the number n occurring in 103n+3 (short scale) or 106n (long scale) and concatenating Latin roots for its units, tens, and hundreds place, together with the suffix -illion. In this way, numbers up to 103·999+3 = 103000 (short scale) or 106·999 = 105994 (long scale) may be named. The choice of roots and the concatenation procedure is that of the standard dictionary numbers if n is 9 or smaller. For larger n (between 10 and 999), prefixes can be constructed based on a system described by Conway and Guy.[18] Today, sexdecillion and novemdecillion are standard dictionary numbers and, using the same reasoning as Conway and Guy did for the numbers up to nonillion, could probably be used to form acceptable prefixes. The Conway–Guy system for forming prefixes:[18]: 15 

Units Tens Hundreds
1 Un N Deci NX Centi
2 Duo MS Viginti N Ducenti
3 Tre[a] NS Triginta NS Trecenti
4 Quattuor NS Quadraginta NS Quadringenti
5 Quinqua[b] NS Quinquaginta NS Quingenti
6 Se[a] N Sexaginta N Sescenti
7 Septe[a] N Septuaginta N Septingenti
8 Octo MX Octoginta MX Octingenti
9 Nove[a] Nonaginta Nongenti
  1. ^ a b c d When preceding a component marked S or X, "tre" changes to "tres" and "se" to "ses" or "sex"; similarly, when preceding a component marked M or N, "septe" and "nove" change to "septem" and "novem" or "septen" and "noven".
  2. ^ Conway and Guy originally used "quinqua" but as a result of Miakinen's suggestion "quin" is mostly used.

The Conway–Guy system disagrees with some standard dictionary names, like "quindecillion", "sexdecillion", and "novemdecillion". Oliver Miakinen argued that since "quindecillion" is a widely accepted term, and the Latin for 15 is actually quindecim and not quinquadecim, the prefix "quinqua-" should be replaced with "quin-". This new prefix is more commonly used nowadays.[20]

Since the system of using Latin prefixes will become ambiguous for numbers with exponents of a size which the Romans rarely counted to, like 106,000,258, Conway and Guy co-devised with Allan Wechsler the following set of consistent conventions that permit, in principle, the extension of this system indefinitely to provide English short-scale names for any integer whatsoever.[18] The name of a number 103n+3, where n is greater than or equal to 1000, is formed by concatenating the names of the numbers of the form 103m+3, where m represents each group of comma-separated digits of n, with each but the last "-illion" trimmed to "-illi-", or, in the case of m = 0, either "-nilli-" or "-nillion".[18] For example, 103,000,012, the 1,000,003rd "-illion" number, equals one "millinillitrillion"; 1033,002,010,111, the 11,000,670,036th "-illion" number, equals one "undecillinilli­septua­ginta­ses­centilli­sestrigint­illion"; and 1029,629,629,633, the 9,876,543,210th "-illion" number, equals one "nonillise­septua­ginta­octingentillitres­quadra­ginta­quingentillideciducent­illion".[18]

The following table shows number names generated by the system described by Conway and Guy for the short and long scales.[21]

Base -illion
(short scale)
Base -illion
(long scale)
Value US, Canada and modern British
(short scale)
Traditional British
(long scale)
Traditional European
(Peletier long scale)
1 1 106 million million million
2 1 109 billion thousand million milliard
3 2 1012 trillion billion billion
4 2 1015 quadrillion thousand billion billiard
5 3 1018 quintillion trillion trillion
6 3 1021 sextillion thousand trillion trilliard
7 4 1024 septillion quadrillion quadrillion
8 4 1027 octillion thousand quadrillion quadrilliard
9 5 1030 nonillion quintillion quintillion
10 5 1033 decillion thousand quintillion quintilliard
11 6 1036 undecillion sextillion sextillion
12 6 1039 duodecillion thousand sextillion sextilliard
13 7 1042 tredecillion septillion septillion
14 7 1045 quattuordecillion thousand septillion septilliard
15 8 1048 quindecillion octillion octillion
16 8 1051 sedecillion[a] thousand octillion octilliard
17 9 1054 septendecillion nonillion nonillion
18 9 1057 octodecillion thousand nonillion nonilliard
19 10 1060 novendecillion[a] decillion decillion
20 10 1063 vigintillion thousand decillion decilliard
21 11 1066 unvigintillion undecillion undecillion
22 11 1069 duovigintillion thousand undecillion undecilliard
23 12 1072 tresvigintillion duodecillion duodecillion
24 12 1075 quattuor­vigint­illion thousand duodecillion duodecilliard
25 13 1078 quinvigintillion tredecillion tredecillion
26 13 1081 sesvigintillion thousand tredecillion tredecilliard
27 14 1084 septemvigintillion quattuordecillion quattuordecillion
28 14 1087 octovigintillion thousand quattuordecillion quattuordecilliard
29 15 1090 novemvigintillion quindecillion quindecillion
30 15 1093 trigintillion thousand quindecillion quindecilliard
31 16 1096 untrigintillion sedecillion[a] sedecillion[a]
32 16 1099 duotrigintillion thousand sedecillion[a] sedecilliard[a]
33 17 10102 trestrigintillion septendecillion septendecillion
34 17 10105 quattuor­trigint­illion thousand septendecillion septendecilliard
35 18 10108 quintrigintillion octodecillion octodecillion
36 18 10111 sestrigintillion thousand octodecillion octodecilliard
37 19 10114 septentrigintillion novendecillion[a] novendecillion[a]
38 19 10117 octotrigintillion thousand novendecillion[a] novendecilliard[a]
39 20 10120 noventrigintillion vigintillion vigintillion
40 20 10123 quadragintillion thousand vigintillion vigintilliard
50 25 10153 quinquagintillion thousand quinvigintillion quinvigintilliard
60 30 10183 sexagintillion thousand trigintillion trigintilliard
70 35 10213 septuagintillion thousand quintrigintillion quintrigintilliard
80 40 10243 octogintillion thousand quadragintillion quadragintilliard
90 45 10273 nonagintillion thousand quin­quadra­gint­illion quin­quadra­gint­illiard
100 50 10303 centillion thousand quinquagintillion quinquagintilliard
101 51 10306 uncentillion unquinquagintillion unquinquagintillion
110 55 10333 decicentillion thousand quin­quinqua­gint­illion quin­quinqua­gint­illiard
111 56 10336 undecicentillion ses­quinqua­gint­illion ses­quinqua­gint­illion
120 60 10363 viginticentillion thousand sexagintillion sexagintilliard
121 61 10366 unviginticentillion unsexagintillion unsexagintillion
130 65 10393 trigintacentillion thousand quinsexagintillion quinsexagintilliard
140 70 10423 quadra­gintacent­illion thousand septuagintillion septuagintilliard
150 75 10453 quinqua­gintacent­illion thousand quin­septua­gint­illion quin­septua­gint­illiard
160 80 10483 sexagintacentillion thousand octogintillion octogintilliard
170 85 10513 septuagintacentillion thousand quinoctogintillion quinoctogintilliard
180 90 10543 octogintacentillion thousand nonagintillion nonagintilliard
190 95 10573 nonagintacentillion thousand quinnonagintillion quinnonagintilliard
200 100 10603 ducentillion thousand centillion centilliard
300 150 10903 trecentillion thousand quinqua­gintacent­illion quinqua­gintacent­illiard
400 200 101203 quadringentillion thousand ducentillion ducentilliard
500 250 101503 quingentillion thousand quinqua­gintaducent­illion quinqua­gintaducent­illiard
600 300 101803 sescentillion thousand trecentillion trecentilliard
700 350 102103 septingentillion thousand quinqua­gintatrecent­illion quinqua­gintatrecent­illiard
800 400 102403 octingentillion thousand quadringentillion quadringentilliard
900 450 102703 nongentillion thousand quinqua­ginta­quadringent­illion quinqua­ginta­quadringent­illiard
1000 500 103003 millinillion[22] thousand quingentillion quingentilliard
  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j While, today, sexdecillion and novemdecillion are standard dictionary numbers, these numbers are called "sedecillion" and "novendecillion" respectively in the Conway and Guy system. The same applies to the long scale forms "sedecilliard" and "novendecilliard".

Unit prefixes

[edit]

The following table lists the unit prefixes for powers of 1000 and 1024 according to the International System of Quantities (ISQ).

Decimal Binary
Value SI Value IEC
1000 k kilo 1024 Ki kibi
10002 M mega 10242 Mi mebi
10003 G giga 10243 Gi gibi
10004 T tera 10244 Ti tebi
10005 P peta 10245 Pi pebi
10006 E exa 10246 Ei exbi
10007 Z zetta 10247 Zi zebi
10008 Y yotta 10248 Yi yobi
10009 R ronna 10249 Ri robi
100010 Q quetta 102410 Qi quebi

Other named large numbers used in mathematics, physics and chemistry

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Names of large numbers refer to the specialized terminology used in mathematics and science to denote integers vastly exceeding a million, typically structured around powers of ten using systematic suffixes like "-illion" to facilitate communication of enormous quantities. These names originated in the late 15th century with French mathematician Nicolas Chuquet, who introduced terms such as byllion for 101210^{12} and tryllion for 101810^{18}, forming the basis of the long scale system where each successive name multiplies the previous by 10610^6. Over time, two primary scales emerged: the short scale, predominant in the United States and modern English usage, where each name increases by 10310^3 (e.g., million = 10610^6, billion = 10910^9, trillion = 101210^{12}), and the long scale, traditional in much of continental Europe, where increments are by 10610^6 (e.g., billion = 101210^{12}, trillion = 101810^{18}). In the short scale, the naming convention extends progressively using Latin prefixes: quadrillion for 101510^{15}, quintillion for 101810^{18}, sextillion for 102110^{21}, septillion for 102410^{24} (transliterated in Hindi as सेप्टिलियन, sepṭiliyan, meaning a number 1 followed by 24 zeros or एक के बाद 24 शून्य वाला संख्या), octillion for 102710^{27}, nonillion for 103010^{30}, and continues to centillion for 1030310^{303}. Centillion remains the largest standard -illion name in the English short scale, as recognized in authoritative dictionaries and references. No higher -illion names were officially introduced or recognized in 2025 or 2026. This allows precise expression up to extraordinarily high powers of ten. The long scale mirrors this structure but shifts the values, with milliard for 10910^9, billion for 101210^{12}, billiard for 101510^{15}, for 101810^{18}, and so forth, reaching centillion for 1060010^{600}. These systems ensure consistency in , though regional preferences persist; for instance, the officially adopted the short scale in 1974 for most contexts. Beyond standard -illion names, mathematicians have coined informal terms for exceptionally large numbers to illustrate scale or for recreational purposes, such as the googol, defined as 1010010^{100} (a 1 followed by 100 zeros), invented around 1920 by nine-year-old Milton Sirotta at the suggestion of his uncle, American mathematician Edward Kasner. Kasner further proposed googolplex as 10googol10^{\text{googol}}, or 1 followed by a googol zeros, emphasizing the conceptual vastness beyond practical computation. For even larger scales, systems like the one developed by John Horton Conway and Richard K. Guy in their 1996 book The Book of Numbers provide a comprehensive Latin-based framework using recursive prefixes to name arbitrarily large powers of ten, bridging standard nomenclature with advanced googology.

Historical Development

Origins of Standard Names

The foundational names for powers of ten in Western traditions trace their etymological roots to Latin and Greek, reflecting a conceptual buildup from smaller units. The word "million," introduced in the late , derives from the million, itself from the Italian milione, an form of mille—Latin for "thousand"—implying a "great thousand" or the square of a thousand (thousand thousands). This suffix -one emphasized magnitude, aligning with the need to denote 10^6 in emerging commercial and scientific contexts. Ancient numbering systems further influenced these developments, particularly the Greek concept of the myrias (μυριάς), denoting 10^4 or , which served as a practical upper limit in classical arithmetic before more expansive notations arose. In parallel, Chinese systems employed a similar unit, wàn (萬), also meaning 10^4, as a foundational block for higher powers in their traditional and texts. However, Western adoption of the myriad remained limited, functioning primarily as a fixed large unit rather than a scalable base for exponential naming, unlike its more integrated role in Eastern traditions. The conceptual framework for evolved significantly through medieval and Indian numeral systems, which transmitted innovations like zero and positional place value from (circa 6th-7th century CE) via scholars such as in the . These advancements, detailed in works like al-Khwarizmi's On the Calculation with Hindu Numerals, replaced additive Roman methods with a decimal system where digit position determined value, profoundly impacting the ability to conceptualize and express vast quantities without inventing myriad individual symbols. This place-value innovation, reaching by the , underpinned the linguistic shifts toward systematic names for powers of ten. In the , French contributions formalized these roots into structured . Jehan , in his 1475 manuscript Traicté en Arismétique, defined "million" as 10^6 and extended it with terms like "bymillion" (for 10^12) and "trimillion" (for 10^18), marking the earliest recorded use of such multipliers to denote escalating powers. Building on this, Nicolas Chuquet's 1484 treatise Triparty en la science des nombres introduced "billion" explicitly as a million millions (10^12), establishing a precursor to the long scale where each subsequent name multiplies the prior by 10^6, thus systematizing the naming of for arithmetic and algebraic purposes.

Standardization in Dictionaries

In the 19th century, American dictionaries began adopting the short scale for large numbers, defining terms like billion as 10^9 to align with emerging U.S. numeration practices distinct from British traditions. Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language exemplified this shift, noting that under the "French and American method of numeration," billion refers to a thousand millions (1,000,000,000), while acknowledging the English method as a million millions (1,000,000,000,000). This dual notation reflected ongoing transatlantic influences but prioritized the short scale for American usage, influencing subsequent U.S. lexicographical works. The debate between the short scale (where each successive term multiplies the previous by 1,000) and the long scale (multiplying by 1,000,000) persisted into the , with French lexicographical traditions favoring the short scale as early as the . The Dictionnaire de l'Académie française, from its 1762 edition onward, defined billion as a thousand millions, aligning with short-scale definitions in some lexicographical works, though long-scale usage predominated in French practice and contributed to ongoing debates on standardization. However, in practice, continued using the long scale, officially adopting the short scale in 1948 before reverting to the long scale in 1961 via government decree, where billion denotes 101210^{12}. By the 1920s, this preference gained broader endorsement amid growing global economic and scientific exchanges, though formal institutional shifts varied by region. Institutions like the played a pivotal role in codifying these names for English speakers, systematically documenting terms up to nonillion (10^30 on the short scale) based on historical attestations and contemporary usage. The OED's entries, drawing from citations dating back to the , helped solidify the in scholarly and formal contexts while noting regional variations. Similarly, British dictionaries such as Chambers's Twentieth Century Dictionary (1901 edition) listed names extending to decillion, reflecting long scale conventions at the time but anticipating convergence toward short scale norms. Regional variations culminated in official adoptions, notably the British government's 1974 endorsement of the short scale to resolve ambiguities in international communication. Prime Minister stated in that "billion" would thenceforth mean 1,000 million in official usage, aligning with American and global standards to prevent confusion in financial and scientific reporting. This decision marked a key milestone in dictionary standardization, as subsequent editions of major references like the OED and others uniformly adopted the short scale for terms beyond million.

Core Naming System

Standard Dictionary Numbers

The standard dictionary names for large numbers in the short scale system, prevalent in English-speaking countries like the and modern British usage, denote powers of 10 beginning from 10^3. These names follow a systematic pattern derived from Latin numerical prefixes combined with the suffix "-illion," where "million" represents the base (10^6), "billion" the second power (10^9), "" the third (10^12), and so on up to "decillion" as the tenth (10^33). This pattern, known as the -illion system, was formalized in dictionaries during the 19th and 20th centuries to provide consistent terminology for numerical scales in scientific, financial, and general writing. The term "thousand" (10^3) precedes the -illion series as a foundational unit, originating from but standardized in modern dictionaries independently of the Latin-based pattern. In contrast, the long scale, used in many parts of and occasionally in until the , assigns different values, such as "billion" for 10^12 (a million million); contemporary global standards increasingly favor the short scale for clarity in international contexts. For reference, the following table lists the standard short-scale names, their corresponding powers of 10, and the Latin root prefixes (noting that "thousand" and "million" are exceptions to the strict prefix pattern):
NamePower of 10Latin Root Prefix
thousand10^3(none; from Latin mille)
million10^6(none; from Latin mille)
billion10^9bi- (2)
trillion10^12tri- (3)
quadrillion10^15quad- (4)
quintillion10^18quint- (5)
sextillion10^21sext- (6)
septillion10^24sept- (7)
octillion10^27oct- (8)
nonillion10^30non- (9)
decillion10^33dec- (10)
These definitions are codified in major dictionaries, ensuring uniformity in denoting vast quantities without ambiguity .

Usage in Contexts

The short scale, where a billion denotes 10^9 and a trillion 10^12, predominates in and modern global English-language media, facilitating concise expression of vast quantities. In contrast, the long scale, defining a billion as 10^12 and a trillion as 10^18, continues to be used in some continental European countries and , reflecting historical French influences on numerical . This divergence has occasionally led to cross-cultural misunderstandings in international collaborations, though the short scale has gained traction worldwide due to American economic and cultural dominance. In , terms like are routinely invoked to describe national debts, such as the ' federal debt exceeding $38 as of November 2025, underscoring the scale of impacts on global economies. Astronomy frequently employs to quantify celestial phenomena, with estimates placing the number of stars in the at approximately 100 to 400 billion, aiding in conceptualizing the universe's immensity. Everyday language integrates these names more casually, as in references to "a million bucks" for modest windfalls or "billions served" in fast-food marketing, embedding them in popular discourse without invoking precise computation. The International Organization for Standardization's ISO 80000-1:2009 standard endorses the short scale for scientific nomenclature by aligning decimal prefixes like giga- (10^9) and tera- (10^12) with these values, promoting uniformity in technical documentation and measurements. Media reporting has not been immune to errors stemming from scale ambiguities, such as conflating billion and in budget discussions, which amplified confusion during the UK's gradual transition to short-scale usage post-1974, with lingering mix-ups noted into the . To enhance clarity, style guides recommend pairing named with , such as expressing a as 10^{12}, which mitigates misinterpretation in and while preserving readability. This practice is particularly vital in interdisciplinary fields where audiences may vary in their familiarity with scale conventions.

Notable Extensions

The Googol Family

The googol is defined as the number 1010010^{100}, or 1 followed by 100 zeros. This term was coined in 1938 by American mathematician while seeking a memorable name for an extraordinarily large quantity to illustrate concepts in popular . The name originated from Kasner's nine-year-old nephew, Milton Sirotta, who suggested "googol" during a family discussion on naming vast numbers. Kasner popularized the term in his 1940 book Mathematics and the Imagination, co-authored with James R. Newman, where it served as an accessible example of beyond everyday scales. Building on the googol, Kasner introduced the as 10\googol10^{\googol}, or 1 followed by a googol zeros, emphasizing its incomprehensible magnitude. He described the as so vast that it cannot be written out in full, even if every atom in the were used to inscribe its digits, highlighting the limits of physical representation for such numbers. In the book, Kasner noted that the exceeds not only the particles in the but also any practical enumeration, underscoring its role in demonstrating the power of iterated . The has served as a benchmark in for comparing exponential scales, such as approximating 23328.75×10992^{332} \approx 8.75 \times 10^{99}, which is just shy of a and illustrates binary nearing decimal powers of ten. Beyond academia, the term gained cultural prominence when it inspired the name of the technology company in 1998; founders and adopted a playful misspelling of "" to reflect their ambition to organize the world's vast information. This connection has embedded the in , often evoking ideas of and computational scale.

Systematic Extensions

The illion naming system, which assigns names to powers of 10 based on multiples of three zeros, extends beyond standard dictionary terms like nonillion (103010^{30}) by incorporating additional Latin numerical prefixes to denote higher exponents in the short scale. For instance, undecillion denotes 103610^{36}, duodecillion 103910^{39}, and this pattern continues systematically with prefixes such as tredec- for 13 (104210^{42}), quattuordec- for 14 (104510^{45}), and so on, reaching vigintillion for 20 (106310^{63}) and novemvigintillion for 29 (109010^{90}). The system culminates in centillion for 100 (1030310^{303}). Centillion is the highest -illion name considered part of the standard dictionary nomenclature in the short scale; further extensions beyond this are non-standard and include more complex prefix combinations or systems like the Conway-Guy method. These extensions rely on more complex prefix combinations, such as uncentillion (1030610^{306}) or ducentillion (1060310^{603}), allowing for names up to and beyond 10300310^{3003}. These extensions maintain consistency with the core illion pattern, where the prefix indicates the number of groups of three zeros beyond the initial three, ensuring scalability for mathematical and scientific contexts requiring verbal descriptions of vast quantities. For numbers far exceeding centillion, the Conway–Guy system provides a rigorous framework for generating names using Latin-derived prefixes for both prime and composite indices, developed in the as part of broader explorations in . The method treats the exponent e=3k+3e = 3k + 3 (where kk is the index), naming the kk-illion by expressing kk in broken into units, tens, and hundreds, then appending "-illion" after assimilation rules to handle vowel and consonant junctions (e.g., inserting an "i" or "e" for ). For example, k=1000k=1000 (Latin mille, meaning thousand) yields millillion for 10300310^{3003}, while larger composites like k=2000k=2000 become duomillillion (10600310^{6003}). This chained approach extends recursively: for k=106k=10^6 (named million in the base system), the result is millionillion (103×106+310^{3 \times 10^6 + 3}), enabling names for arbitrarily large powers of 10 through linguistic composition rather than ad-hoc invention. Although notations like Knuth's up-arrow provide symbolic representations for hyperoperations yielding immense non-power-of-10 values (e.g., 33=333=76255974849873 \uparrow\uparrow 3 = 3^{3^3} = 7625597484987), verbal extensions in the illion tradition prioritize pronounceable names for powers of 10, bridging linguistic and mathematical needs without direct overlap. These systematic verbal methods, however, face practical limitations for exponents beyond approximately 1010610^{10^6}, where the required prefix chains become excessively long and phonetically cumbersome, leading to ambiguities in spelling, pronunciation, and comprehension (e.g., near-homophones like sexoctogintillion versus sexoctingentillion). Such complexity renders the names unwieldy for everyday or even specialized , often favoring numerical notation instead.

Specialized Applications

Binary Prefixes

Binary prefixes, also known as IEC binary prefixes, are a standardized system of naming conventions for powers of two, primarily used in to denote such as bytes and bits. These prefixes address the historical ambiguity where terms like "" were applied to both (powers of 10) and binary (powers of 2) multiples, leading to confusion in and memory capacities. The (IEC) introduced this system in Amendment 2 to IEC 60027-2 in 1998, with the prefixes formally defined as contractions like "kibi" for kilobinary, to clearly differentiate them from SI prefixes such as (10^3). The core definitions include kibi (Ki) for 2^10 = , mebi (Mi) for 2^20 ≈ 1.048576 million, and gibi (Gi) for 2^30 ≈ 1.073742 billion, extending upward to larger scales. This ensures precision in technical contexts, where binary alignment with is essential. However, common misuse persists: the term "" (KB) is often used informally to mean bytes in software and operating systems, despite the strict SI definition of 1000 bytes, contributing to discrepancies in reported storage sizes.
Prefix NameSymbolValue (Power of 2)Approximate Decimal Equivalent
kibiKi2^10 = 1.024 × 10^3
mebiMi2^20 = 1,048,5761.049 × 10^6
gibiGi2^30 = 1,073,741,8241.074 × 10^9
tebiTi2^40 = 1,099,511,627,7761.100 × 10^12
pebiPi2^50 = 1,125,899,906,842,6241.126 × 10^15
exbiEi2^60 = 1,152,921,504,606,846,9761.153 × 10^18
zebiZi2^70 = 1,180,591,620,717,411,303,4241.181 × 10^21
yobiYi2^80 = 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,1761.209 × 10^24
These prefixes are applied in scenarios like RAM sizing, where capacities are expressed in mebibytes (MiB) or gibibytes (GiB) to reflect binary addressing, and file storage, where a 1 TB hard drive is marketed as 10^12 bytes (1 bytes) but may appear as approximately 0.909 TiB (2^40 bytes) in operating systems due to binary calculations.

Named Numbers in Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry

In mathematics, certain large numbers have acquired specific names due to their role as upper bounds or extremal values in proofs, often involving advanced notation like Knuth's up-arrow. Graham's number, introduced in 1971, serves as an upper bound for a problem in Ramsey theory concerning the minimal dimension where certain hypercube colorings guarantee monochromatic substructures. Defined recursively using up-arrow notation, it begins with g1=33g_1 = 3 \uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow 3 and iterates to g64g_{64}, rendering it vastly larger than a googolplex while remaining finite. Another prominent mathematical giant is TREE(3), derived from the TREE function in , which measures the longest possible sequence of distinct trees labeled with up to three colors that avoids embeddability under homeomorphic ordering, as per . This function arises in studies of well-quasi-orderings and was formalized in the context of proving finite bounds for infinite tree collections, with TREE(3) exceeding by orders of magnitude in growth rate due to its hierarchical construction. In physics, large named numbers often estimate cosmic scales or theoretical limits. The Eddington number, approximately 1.57×10791.57 \times 10^{79}, represents the estimated total number of protons in the , derived from combining stellar counts, galactic distributions, and the fine-structure constant's reciprocal (then approximately 136). This value, proposed by in the 1930s, underscored early attempts to quantify universal contents through fundamental constants. A related concept in involves the scale factor of about 1012010^{120}, sometimes referred to in discussions of hypothetical Planck-scale entities, arising from the discrepancy between predictions for density (cut off at the Planck scale) and the observed . This immense ratio highlights the challenge of reconciling with , where theoretical vacuum fluctuations suggest energies 1012010^{120} times larger than measured, implying a vast number of suppressed quantum modes or particles at the Planck regime. In chemistry, Avogadro's number, precisely 6.02214076×10236.02214076 \times 10^{23} per mole, quantifies the number of constituent particles (atoms, molecules, etc.) in one mole of substance, enabling the bridge between microscopic and macroscopic scales in reactions. Named after Amedeo Avogadro, who in 1811 hypothesized that equal volumes of gases under identical conditions contain equal numbers of molecules, this constant was later quantified through electrolysis and X-ray crystallography, formalizing the mole in the International System of Units. Beyond these fields, Skewes' number, approximately 1010103410^{10^{10^{34}}}, emerged in as an upper bound for the first sign change in the difference between the π(x)\pi(x) and the logarithmic integral li(x)\mathrm{li}(x), challenging the theorem's approximation under the . Stanley Skewes established this bound in 1933, assuming the hypothesis holds, to demonstrate that discrepancies must occur before this enormous threshold. Rayo's number, defined in 2007 during a "big number duel" at MIT, claims the title of the largest explicitly named finite number by leveraging formal language: it is the smallest integer greater than any finite number definable by a first-order set-theory formula using at most a googol ( 1010010^{100} ) symbols. This construction exploits the expressive power of set theory to enumerate and surpass all smaller describable quantities, far outpacing traditional recursive definitions.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.