5 square meters, 5m2

[Winder]

Having an argument at work.

I THINK

5 square meters is 5 x 1 meter squares (imagine 5 massive flagstones that are 1m x 1m)

Then 5m2 is 5 meters x 5 meters (25 massive flagstones that are 1m x 1m)

MY BOSS THINKS

They are both the same

HIS BOSS THINKS

The opposite of what I said

Google and various other searchs come up with different answers. The other blokes in work can't agree.

What is the right answer

[Owenski]

They're the same.

The "square" refers to area, area is always calculated based on length x depth.
I would guess one is an Americanism, but they're both the same.

5m2 doesnt equal 25m2, 5m2 = 5m2. Using your flagstone thing, both are 5No. 1x1m flagstones.

25m2 would require a 5x5square of 1x1m flagstones (or other variant)

[Spank86]

They are both the same IMO. Although linguistically they ought not to be.

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

[L3nny]

5x5 = 5 squared = 25

5x1 = 5

[Owenski]

They are both the same IMO. Although linguistically they ought not to be.

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

Awesome word selection of the day!

[SIII]

Having an argument at work.

I THINK

5 square meters is 5 x 1 meter squares (imagine 5 massive flagstones that are 1m x 1m)

Then 5m2 is 5 meters x 5 meters (25 massive flagstones that are 1m x 1m)



I agree.:smt008

Used to fit flooring for a living and they are not the same thing!

[Specialone]

They're the same.

The "square" refers to area, area is always calculated based on length x depth.
I would guess one is an Americanism, but they're both the same.

5m2 doesnt equal 25m2, 5m2 = 5m2. Using your flagstone thing, both are 5No. 1x1m flagstones.

25m2 would require a 5x5square of 1x1m flagstones (or other variant)

Bang on :)
I agree.:smt008

Used to fit flooring for a living and they are not the same thing!


If you're saying what I think you're saying, I can understand why you no longer fit flooring for a living :rolleyes:

Either you overpriced your jobs by five times or did them for a fifth of what they should've been.

[Specialone]

I can't believe I'm reading this thread tbh, it's very basic maths.

Go buy a box of tiles or flooring, it will say on the box for a square metre, 1m2.

[Spank86]

Or perhaps he only put flooring in a fifth of each room?

[L3nny]

So if you have a tile that is 1m x 1m and you call that 1 square meter. What do you call 5 of them?

I know you call it 5m x 1m really but you can see where the confusion lies.

[Specialone]

So if you have a tile that is 1m x 1m and you call that 1 square meter. What do you call 5 of them?

I know you call it 5m x 1m really but you can see where the confusion lies.

No, I can't see any reason for confusion tbh.

If they sell 1mx1m tiles in a box of 5, that's 5 square metres, it will say on the box 5m2.

I swear I'm being wound up :smt019

[Spank86]

You call it five square meters, because it is five lots of one square meter,

Or five meter square, because it is five lots of a meter square.

[Bibio]

5 square meters is 1 meter x 5 meters = 5 sq/mtr

5 meter squared is 5 meters x 5 meters = 25 sq/mtr

[Cymraeg_Atodeg]

5m2 is 5 meters squared, so, in it is an area within a set boundry it has a value of 5 metres.

So, you can have a 5m x 1m shape or 2.5m x 2m shape are any combination as long as the value of the numbers multiplied together comes to 5.

[L3nny]

Haha, oh yer

It's been a long day.

BTW, I don't fit flooring

[Winder]

5x5 = 5 squared = 25

5x1 = 5

That's why I thought they were different.
My understanding was one was
5 lots of a square meter = 5^1 = 5x1 = 5
And the other was
5 x 5 lots of a square meter= 5^2 = 5x5 = 25

Now you have the m2 is ref area only it makes sense that they are the same as its not the number ^2.

We only say cubic m/cm etc when referring to volume, we don't say meters cubed! Probably is an Americanism mate

[LankyIanB]

m = measurement of length
m2 (2 should be superscript) = square meter (meter squared) = measurement of area.

1m * 1m = 1m2 - one square meter
1m * 5m = 5m2 - five square meters
5m * 5m = 25m2 - twenty five square meters

[Spank86]

Why not avoid the issue and only take measurements in Fractions of an acre?

[Specialone]

Or use knots on a piece of rope :rolleyes:

[Spank86]

I don't mean to question your suggestion but would that actually avoid the issue?

Since you wouldn't know if it was five knots by one knot or five knots but five knots?

[L3nny]

5 squared meters squared = 25 square meters :p

[Specialone]

I don't mean to question your suggestion but would that actually avoid the issue?

Since you wouldn't know if it was five knots by one knot or five knots but five knots?

[-o<:smt022:help::smt119

[tigersaw]

An acre is a furlong by a chain.
Yes we really did chant that stuff at school in the 60's

[MisterTommyH]

Basic maths fail!

I think the problem is coming from the language side though.

- a metre squared (m²) is a unit of length subjected to a mathematical function - in the case multiplied by itself. So a metre x metre.

- a square metre (in my mind) is a visual representation of the same. i.e. a square that has a side of length 1m.

The problem comes when you start putting squared metre - which is a term that I've never come across. Similarly a metre square (although if it's possible that seems less wrong).

Now I'm looking back at this post and I'm convinced I've spelt square wrong...:pukel:

I think we should make it easy and measure things in 2 steps by 3 steps etc.

[Captain Nemo]

i think

your boss is a tool and if running a construction business he should have been laughed out of it or gone bust by now.............

[Spank86]

Is there a reason you think that?

[The Idle Biker]

Can we go back to Yards and feet, surely that's where it all started to go wrong. I blame Europe!

[Messie]

I'm glad I learned all this when I did. I can think in metric or feet and inches.

It's always smaller than they think though!

[Specialone]

Can we go back to Yards and feet, surely that's where it all started to go wrong. I blame Europe!

Same thing though mate, if you can't distinguish between a measure of area correctly, you're still screwed :)

[Specialone]

i think

your boss is a tool and if running a construction business he should have been laughed out of it or gone bust by now.............

Why is he a tool?

His direct boss was bang on correct, it's the op that should step away from the quote book and calculator ;)

[Mark_h]

5 square meters is 5m x 1m
5 meters square is 5m x 5m

We should have a bi-weekly meeting to keep track of this issue. Now... Is that twice a week or once a fortnight?

[DJFridge]

A 5 metre square is 5m x 5m which gives you a total area of 25m2. 5m2 is just that - 5m2

End of.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is just wrong.:smt019

Apologies for the grumpiness, I seem to have been dealing with idiots who can't count or add up all day already, don't need it in my leisure time too;)

[Spank86]

Wait, 'a five meter square' is a new term, we werent even discussing that one were we?

[DJFridge]

Wait, 'a five meter square' is a new term, we werent even discussing that one were we?

I don't know, I'm THAT grumpy!! Must cheer up, going out for a meal in an hour and the Tanglefoot is calling...

[timwilky]

it is down to the unit in this case m²


so 5m² is 5 instances of 1m²


5 square metre or 5²m is 5*5 instances of the metre unit = 25m which is a totally dimension. It is a single dimension whereas a m² is two dimensional

However, people use metre squared and square metre in the same way to mean m²

[Winder]

Well, looks like I'm not the only one.

So far the following people are going with what I originally thought, that is THEY ARE 2 DIFFERENT AREAS

Timwilky
Mark_h
Bibio
S111

The following people Say THEY ARE THE SAME AREA

Owenski
Spank
Specialone
Cymraeg_Atodeg
LankyIanB
MisterTommyH

Others just wrote things like 5x1=5 5x5=25 or 5m2=5m2.
The question is

IS 5m2 EQUAL TO 5 SQ MTRS

After actually thinking about it the answer is obviously YES they are the same. I have no idea why I had it in my head that they were different. But I'm glad it's split the class, I feel like I is like not as stupider as I fought I was innit bruv.

[Lozzo]

I don't care if it's the same or not, I don't dirty my hands doing the laying of slabs or whatever, I get a man in to do it for me.

[punyXpress]

. . bring on the cubes! ;)

[Fallout]

I can see why you never make it out for rides now Mark. Too busy contemplating complex maths problems.

[Specialone]

Well, looks like I'm not the only one.

So far the following people are going with what I originally thought, that is THEY ARE 2 DIFFERENT AREAS

Timwilky
Mark_h
Bibio
S111

The following people Say THEY ARE THE SAME AREA

Owenski
Spank
Specialone
Cymraeg_Atodeg
LankyIanB
MisterTommyH

Others just wrote things like 5x1=5 5x5=25 or 5m2=5m2.
The question is

IS 5m2 EQUAL TO 5 SQ MTRS

After actually thinking about it the answer is obviously YES they are the same. I have no idea why I had it in my head that they were different. But I'm glad it's split the class, I feel like I is like not as stupider as I fought I was innit bruv.

Errr, Tim didn't say they were different, he was explaining why some people could confuse the wording.

[slark01]

Enlish/American english: 5 meters squared and 5 square meters
5 meters squared ( 5m2 ) is a square 5m by 5m, thats 25 square meters.

Basic maths and english is needed to understand this ' snigger' ;-) ONLY JOKING!!!

Ste.
http://www.amathsdictionaryforkids.com/dictionary.html

[ophic]

I think it's all in the "d".

5 squared metres = (5^2)m = 25 metres - not a common term though.
5 square metres = 5m^2 = 5 metres squared

But a room 5 metres square (no "d") would be a square room of side length 5m, which would be 25 metres squared.

[Specialone]

Btw, theres no split camp, there are the folks who know it's right and the others are insignificant :)

[widepants]

Ive got a friggin head ache now

[Grant66]

5 square meters is 5 off 1m²
5m² can be any dimension that makes that area, whether that be a shape 5x1, 2.36x2.36, 1.667x3 or 1x5. It doesn't need to be square it could be a circle 142cm in diameter.

In terms of area they are the same, in terms of shape they can be very different.

[Spank86]

Enlish/American english: 5 meters squared and 5 square meters
5 meters squared ( 5m2 ) is a square 5m by 5m, thats 25 square meters.

Basic maths and english is needed to understand this ' snigger' ;-) ONLY JOKING!!!

Ste.
http://www.amathsdictionaryforkids.com/dictionary.html

Your maths is well out btw, I take it 'basic maths' doesn't extend to algebra? :p:D


But yes 5metered squared would indicate that the 5 was squared

But that would be 5^2 m.

Not 5m^2 which equals 5.

As m is the symbol for 1meter. So 1^2 =1

5*1=5.

[Specialone]

FFS are you lot winding me up?, stop fecking debating this topic now, there is no debate.

A 5m2 square room if labelled as 5m2 indicates a floor area of 5m2, where you lot are getting confused is you're not looking at the significant bit at the end of the dimension (m2)


Im gonna have to wield my mod stick shortly and lock this as its getting rediculous and it would be for the good of the world.


ENOUGH :nomore:

[tactcom7]

I think it's all in the "d".

5 squared metres = (5^2)m = 25 metres - not a common term though.
5 square metres = 5m^2 = 5 metres squared

But a room 5 metres square (no "d") would be a square room of side length 5m, which would be 25 metres squared.

+1

5 metres square = 5 square metres.

5 metres squared is 25 square metres

(sorry Phil)

EDIT Ignore all of the above.

[ophic]

+1

5 metres square = 5 square metres.

5 metres squared is 25 square metres

(sorry Phil)

That's the exact opposite of what I wrote!

[Bibio]

if your boss wrote down 5m2 then he wanted 5sq mtr. if he on the other hand he said 'i want 5 meter square' then that's 25sq mt

[DJFridge]

So where does Alien³ fit in then?;)

[MisterTommyH]

It's all a nonsense anyway. No matter what anyone thinks.... Ask anyone who works with maths / area daily, maths teachers, university lecturers, engineers, quantity surveyors, builders.

None of them would call an area 5m x 5m '5 squared metres' or anything similar. Yes there is some ambiguity in the language, but common usage is that area is defined by the number of times a 1mx1m square could fit into that area.

It would fit into a 5mx1m area 5 times therefore it is 5m.sq

It would fit into a 5mx5m area 25 times therefore it is 25m.sq

[ophic]

So where does Alien³ fit in then?;)
Well if you had 5, and you cubed them, you'd have either 125 aliens, or 5 aliens in cubes, or lots of little bits of aliens :mrgreen:

[Specialone]

It's all a nonsense anyway. No matter what anyone thinks.... Ask anyone who works with maths / area daily, maths teachers, university lecturers, engineers, quantity surveyors, builders.

None of them would call an area 5m x 5m '5 squared metres' or anything similar. Yes there is some ambiguity in the language, but common usage is that area is defined by the number of times a 1mx1m square could fit into that area.

It would fit into a 5mx1m area 5 times therefore it is 5m.sq

It would fit into a 5mx5m area 25 times therefore it is 25m.sq

Exactly :)

[MisterTommyH]

if your boss wrote down 5m2 then he wanted 5sq mtr. if he on the other hand he said 'i want a 5 meter by 5 meter square' then that's 25sq mt

Fixed for you :)

Anything else is ambiguous and you should assume common usage, which is the smaller. Maths has very fixed rules which are not open to interpretation - I remember a similar discussion not too long ago regarding BODMAS.

[The Idle Biker]

So what about 5 metres cubed and 5 cubic metres? Are they identical?

[MisterTommyH]

Yes, if used correctly. Or in construction, simply 5 cube.

[DJFridge]

So what about 5 metres cubed and 5 cubic metres? Are they identical?

Yes, if used correctly. Or in construction, simply 5 cube.

NO NO NO NO NO!! 5 metres cubed is 125 cubic metres. 5 cubic metres is 5 cubic metres

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr

5 cube is also 5 cubic metres (and it's over 20 years since I last supervised a concrete pour).

[ophic]

NO NO NO NO NO!! 5 metres cubed is 125 cubic metres. 5 cubic metres is 5 cubic metres
It's the metres that are cubed, not the 5. The unit, not the number.

It's 5 "metres cubed" not "5 metres" cubed.

[MisterTommyH]

NO NO NO NO NO!! 5 metres cubed is 125 cubic metres. 5 cubic metres is 5 cubic metres

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr

5 cube is also 5 cubic metres (and it's over 20 years since I last supervised a concrete pour).

PMSL.

Google is not DJFridges friend: Right at the top of the page (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=5+metres+cubed&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)


It's the metres that are cubed, not the 5. The unit, not the number.

It's 5 "metres cubed" not "5 metres" cubed.

This!

Right.... It's been fun. But I'm out!

[Owenski]

Oh my ****ing word!

[DJFridge]

PMSL.

Google is not DJFridges friend: Right at the top of the page (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=5+metres+cubed&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)




This!

Excuse me, the first entry is 5 (metres cubed) = 5m³


Which I would agree with.

My argument is that 5 metres cubed (look, no brackets) is 5 metres, cubed. Which is 125m³

[Mrs DJ Fridge]

I have to say that as part of their basic maths (in junior schools) my kids have had to learn squared numbers, 5 squared is 25, 5 x square metres is is 5 x individual metre squares.

Call me stupid if you want but this is really basic junior school maths.

[Spank86]

So five squared is 5^2 but in your opinion meters squared is NOT m^2?

[DJFridge]

O M F*&^ing G!!

A square metre is a real thing. 1, 2, 10 square metres etc. Metres squared only exist with a value in front of it i.e. 4 metres squared. Which is 16 square metres. To say 4 metres squared is the same as 4 square metres is just linguistically wrong. 4 square metres is the same as 2 metres squared. 8 cubic metres is 2 metres cubed. Please can somebody lock this thread before WW3 (not world war cubed or cubic world war btw) breaks out.

that is all

[Souldude]

If you had 5 slabs at 1m X 1m then you would have a measurement of 2.25 square metres

[ophic]

O M F*&^ing G!!

A square metre is a real thing. 1, 2, 10 square metres etc. Metres squared only exist with a value in front of it i.e. 4 metres squared. Which is 16 square metres. To say 4 metres squared is the same as 4 square metres is just linguistically wrong. 4 square metres is the same as 2 metres squared. 8 cubic metres is 2 metres cubed. Please can somebody lock this thread before WW3 (not world war cubed or cubic world war btw) breaks out.

that is all
I'm afraid that although that might seem logical, it's not the way it's defined, nor what is taught about representation of units in GCSE and A level maths and physics, or degree level engineering.

"Metres squared" is a unit, written m². Just like 5 squared is 5².

Five squared, 5²
Metres squared, m²

get the linguistic logic here?

so 5m² is the same as five square metres.

What you're describing would actually be written 5²m² or (5m)²

It's a bit of a conceptual leap to think that you can square units as well as numbers. You can also do the opposite. "Per second" can also be written s^-1, literally "seconds to the power of minus one".

[Winder]

Sooooooooo, that was fun. I look forward to tomorrow's class.

[timwilky]

people

It is quite simple as I have said before you are talking about a unit that describes an area 1m * 1m. For convenience because it is 1*1 we simply call it a m². Instead of m² call it a 1metre flagstone/.


5m² = 5flagstones, not 25.

At the end of the day, we are talking about square units or units squared. Not the dimension squared.

[Owenski]

WOW!
This was cleared up on page 1, how did it make 7 pages?

Just proves Winder, the misconception in your office was a good representation of how society confuses it also.

[-Ralph-]

:smt046 Why didn't I look at this thread title yesterday?

it is down to the unit in this case m²


so 5m² is 5 instances of 1m²


5 square metre or 5²m is 5*5 instances of the metre unit = 25m which is a totally dimension. It is a single dimension whereas a m² is two dimensional

However, people use metre squared and square metre in the same way to mean m²

people

It is quite simple as I have said before you are talking about a unit that describes an area 1m * 1m. For convenience because it is 1*1 we simply call it a m². Instead of m² call it a 1metre flagstone/.


5m² = 5flagstones, not 25.

At the end of the day, we are talking about square units or units squared. Not the dimension squared.

Listen to this man will you guys?

You are confusing the terms of mathematics and algebra

m = 1m

m2 = 1m2 = 1 metre to the power of 2 = 1 x 1 = 1

5m2 = 5 x (1 metre to the power of 2) = 5 x (1 x 1) = 5

5 to the power of 2 = 5 x 5 = 5 squared = 25

5 to the power of 3 = 5 x 5 x 5 = 5 cubed = 125

What matters is which integer you are applying the exponent to.

IT geeks like Tim and I understand this properly because it's the basis of binary numbering.

[timwilky]

Who you calling a geek!!!!

I am first and foremost an engineer. Numbers and their units were for many years my bread and butter.

[Owenski]

*cough

Don't forget us engineering/construction types also Ralph-co.
We're using areas, trig and volumes constantly all day, daily.

Anyone who knows the answer to "What length is the hypotenuse of a right angle triangle with Opposite and Adjacent sides of 3m and 4m length?" With out picking up a calculator will have been clawing their eyes out at this thread.

[-Ralph-]

LOL, I knew that would get a rise :lol:

[flymo]

I'm afraid that although that might seem logical, it's not the way it's defined, nor what is taught about representation of units in GCSE and A level maths and physics, or degree level engineering.

"Metres squared" is a unit, written m². Just like 5 squared is 5².

Five squared, 5²
Metres squared, m²

get the linguistic logic here?

so 5m² is the same as five square metres.

What you're describing would actually be written 5²m² or (5m)²

It's a bit of a conceptual leap to think that you can square units as well as numbers. You can also do the opposite. "Per second" can also be written s^-1, literally "seconds to the power of minus one".

+1 right on the nail. It's all about the units.

Can we move onto my favourite one, how many bytes in a megabyte?

[ophic]

Listen to this man will you guys?
Tim hasn't made his point strongly enough.

There's not enough OMFG *&^% in his posts... :notworthy:

[Luckypants]

can we move onto my favourite one, how many bytes in a megabyte?1048576

[ophic]

+1 right on the nail. It's all about the units.

Can we move onto my favourite one, how many bytes in a megabyte?
Solved with the introduction of mebibytes - except that no-one has heard of or understands these either :(

[-Ralph-]

It is very scary mind you that this thread has gone on so long. I think it has a lot to do with the average age of the .org member I'm afraid.

When I saw last week how the primary school were planning to teach my son to read and write (both at the same time, and entirely in phonetics, including the writing aspect) it suddenly dawned on me why so many young people can't spell.

"Toylet" being a perfectly acceptable spelling of "Toilet" and left uncorrected, because it was phonetically correct, therefore the teacher could understand it, and spelling would be taught separately at a later date. Not a problem for a primary school child to make spelling mistakes, but correct it and explain it at the time IMO, and if they don't get it, correct and explain it it as many times as is required, but don't let them get established in proficient in writing whilst spelling everything phonetically, then attempt to change it later.

I am resigned to the fact I'm going to have to fill in the gaps at at home.

[flymo]

1048576

nope. Its 1 million.

[-Ralph-]

Can we move onto my favourite one, how many bytes in a megabyte?

Can't be rrrsssed typing that one out, have a wiki link ;-)

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

[ophic]

I am resigned to the fact I'm going to have to fill in the gaps at at home.
If you hadn't done that, you wouldn't have a son...

I'm here all week :cool:

[flymo]

Can't be rrrsssed typing that one out, have a wiki link ;-)

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

and another.....

mega, although very widely misused in the binary sense, is an SI prefix meaning 1 million. 1 megabyte = 1,000,000 bytes. The binary representation of 1 mebibyte (MiB) is 1x2^20 bytes or 1,048,576 bytes.

[-Ralph-]

If you hadn't done that, you wouldn't have a son...

I'm here all week :cool:

OK, I'm resigned to the fact I'll have to fill in more gaps at home than my parents had to fill in with me.

My son isn't going to get the same education at school as I got.

[-Ralph-]

and another.....

mega, although very widely misused in the binary sense, is an SI prefix meaning 1 million. 1 megabyte = 1,000,000 bytes. The binary representation of 1 mebibyte (MiB) is 1x2^20 bytes or 1,048,576 bytes.

Ahem.

2 to the power of 20 = 1,048,576

"The binary approximation of the mega-, or 1,000,000 multiplier, which causes a change of prefix. For example: 1,048,576 bytes = 1 megabyte (or mibibyte).

This number has no special significance to computers, but is important to humans because we make use of powers of ten."

[flymo]

Ahem.

2 to the power of 20 = 1,048,576

"The binary approximation of the mega-, or 1,000,000 multiplier, which causes a change of prefix. For example: 1,048,576 bytes = 1 megabyte (or mibibyte).

This number has no special significance to computers, but is important to humans because we make use of powers of ten."

1 megabyte is most certainly not the same thing as 1 mebibyte.

btw... I knew somebody would bite (or byte) ;-)

[-Ralph-]

I think from what the author of the wiki has written, he understands it, but you are being pedantic ;-)

When does misuse of a lingustic term become so common, that actually, it becomes the correct answer?

[ophic]

OK, I'm resigned to the fact I'll have to fill in more gaps at home than my parents had to fill in with me.

My son isn't going to get the same education at school as I got.
Puerile jokes aside, I totally agree with you. I've had many arguments with my kids over correct pronunciation and spelling and mathematics. I'm old school with regards to these things.

eg
12.17 is twelve point one seven, not twelve point seventeen
H is "aitch" not "haitch", never mind what your teacher says...

Mind you at primary school, I was taught that the primary colours were red, yellow and blue. They then scrap all this later on and teach that primary colours are red, green and blue, unless using subtractive method where its magenta, cyan and yellow. So where red, yellow, blue comes from, I've no idea.

[-Ralph-]

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

[flymo]

I think from what the author of the wiki has written, he understands it, but you are being pedantic ;-)

When does misuse of a lingustic term become so common, that actually, it becomes the correct answer?

Well, actually the reverse occurred. It was misused at the start when the error was fairly insignificant. As data volumes have grown it has made an enormous difference.

Pretty much all of the world standards bodies define it precisely. A binary prefix must be used to describe a binary quantity. Using an SI prefix is just incorrect, pedantic or otherwise.

[MisterTommyH]

It is very scary mind you that this thread has gone on so long. I think it has a lot to do with the average age of the .org member I'm afraid.

When I saw last week how the primary school were planning to teach my son to read and write (both at the same time, and entirely in phonetics, including the writing aspect) it suddenly dawned on me why so many young people can't spell.

"Toylet" being a perfectly acceptable spelling of "Toilet" and left uncorrected, because it was phonetically correct, therefore the teacher could understand it, and spelling would be taught separately at a later date. Not a problem for a primary school child to make spelling mistakes, but correct it and explain it at the time IMO, and if they don't get it, correct and explain it it as many times as is required, but don't let them get established in proficient in writing whilst spelling everything phonetically, then attempt to change it later.

I am resigned to the fact I'm going to have to fill in the gaps at at home.

No offense to any teachers here.... but even with the best staff in the world, if the system / guidelines are wrong then it's never going to work.

An ex of mine was a teacher and in her school (academy) she was told she wasn't allowed to mark-down / correct spelling because she wasn't an English teacher.......... so they only have to learn to spell correctly for the 10% of the time they're in English lessons(!)


While we're on the subject of abbreviations I did see this one the other day:
√-1 2³ ∑ π ...........and it was delicious!

Thought it was quite good.

[ophic]

b4i√u ru/16?

[flymo]

b4i√u ru/16?

:-)

[Spank86]

So where red, yellow, blue comes from, I've no idea.
red yellow and blue is correct.

yellow and blue make green but with green red and blue you can't make yellow.

[ophic]

red yellow and blue is correct.

yellow and blue make green but with green red and blue you can't make yellow.
Seriously? :smt104

[Owenski]

+1 to spank.

[Spank86]

Seriously? :smt104
well, I'm willing to admit that I dont have any transparencies with me but Thats the way I remember it being. Although what does red and green make?

[ophic]

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

CMY or RGB

RYB are the primary colours of absolutely naff all.
I'm really amazed people quote stuff for others to read without the vaguest understanding of the subject.

edit: the above is a bit harsh and I apologise. However it does kinda show how outdated 18th century theories make their way into people's heads because they are still taught at schools long after they've been proved wrong.

[timwilky]

b4i√u ru/16?


A long time since I needed that particular equation. Although I wish my son had used it before manufacturing generation 3 wilky. Or even better his girlfriend understanding it resolved to a boolean equation.

[Owenski]

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

CMY or RGB

RYB are the primary colours of absolutely naff all.
I'm really amazed people quote stuff for others to read without the vaguest understanding of the subject.

edit: the above is a bit harsh and I apologise. However it does kinda show how outdated 18th century theories make their way into people's heads because they are still taught at schools long after they've been proved wrong.

Called subtractive on your wiki page works plotter uses Cyan Magenta Yellow... but then again it prints onto white paper which is how we get white, the CMY combo cannot make white.

Primary colours RGB are what you need to make up any other colour by adding various ratios of the RGB selection.

Thats an explanation of my understanding of colours, but Im now not too sure what your original question actually was. :confused: