Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Mohs scale is an ordinal scale. For example, corundum (9) is twice as hard as topaz (8), but diamond (10) is four times as hard as corundum. [ citation needed ] The table below shows the comparison with the absolute hardness measured by a sclerometer , with images of the reference minerals in the rightmost column.
A comprehensive Wikipedia data page detailing the hardness levels of various elements.
The Richter scale [1] (/ ˈ r ɪ k t ər /), also called the Richter magnitude scale, Richter's magnitude scale, and the Gutenberg–Richter scale, [2] is a measure of the strength of earthquakes, developed by Charles Richter in collaboration with Beno Gutenberg, and presented in Richter's landmark 1935 paper, where he called it the "magnitude scale". [3]
Gravitational attraction of the proton and the electron in hydrogen atom [1] 10 −30 quectonewton (qN) 8.9 qN Weight of an electron [1] 10 −26: 16 rN Weight of a hydrogen atom [1] 10 −24 yoctonewton (yN) 5 yN Force necessary to synchronize the motion of a single trapped ion with an external signal measured in a 2010 experiment [2] [3] 10 ...
10 −1: 0.415 bits (log 2 4/3) – amount of information needed to eliminate one option out of four. 0.6–1.3 bits – approximate information per letter of English text. [3] 2 0: bit: 10 0: bit 1 bit – 0 or 1, false or true, Low or High (a.k.a. unibit) 1.442695 bits (log 2 e) – approximate size of a nat (a unit of information based on ...
However, 1 and 15 are not within an order of magnitude, since their ratio is 15/1 = 15 > 10. The reciprocal ratio, 1/15, is less than 0.1, so the same result is obtained. Differences in order of magnitude can be measured on a base-10 logarithmic scale in " decades " (i.e., factors of ten). [ 2 ]
The moment magnitude scale (MMS; denoted explicitly with M or M w or Mwg, and generally implied with use of a single M for magnitude [1]) is a measure of an earthquake's magnitude ("size" or strength) based on its seismic moment. M w was defined in a 1979 paper by Thomas C. Hanks and Hiroo Kanamori.
The Bulgars, at least the Danubian Bulgars, had a well-developed clan and military administrative system of "inner" and "outer" tribes, [109] governed by the ruling clan. [110] They had many titles, and according to Steven Runciman the distinction between titles which represented offices and mere ornamental dignities was somewhat vague. [ 111 ]