More maths than science

[Bellringer]

What is the difference between a square metre and a metre square?

[fo3nix]

square metres are an area. A length may be measured in metres, so an area (such as a square) is two lengths multiplied together, giving metres^2.

This is written metres squared, but it's properly pronounced the other way round, square metres.

As far as I'm aware, that's it.

[Trevilino]

One square metre = 1 metre square but 2 sq.m (1.4142m x 1.4142m) is different to 2m square ( 2 x 2 = 4 sq m)

[scotstone]

No difference numerically, as a square of sides 1m (ie a metre square) has an area of 1 square metre, however a square of 2m side has an area of 4 square metre.

[Loosehead]

1 square metre is any area of any shape that is a total area of 1 square metre. 1 metre square is an actual square of side length 1 metre. It's easier to visualise if you use say, for example 5. So 5 square metres for example could be a rectangle 1 metre by 5 metres but 5 metres square is always a square 5 metres on each side ie 25 square metres. So in general terms n meters square is always a square of side n giving nxn square metres where as n square meters is any shape totalling n square metres.

[Muppit]

Unfortunately, the actual answer is the simple matter of pedanticness / pedanticicity!!

A metre is 1 dimensional. It is what it is and nothing else, simply a length. It has magnitude but no direction. It is a scalar quantity.

There is no such thing as a square metre. It is a common mistake for people to make, as it sounds better.

A metre square on the other hand, is a square of 1 metre width and 1 metre breadth. (A square is a two dimensional entity and therefore can be defined by one or two scalar quantities, i.e. metres).

I hope this is of help,

Mupp

[wildwood]

A square metre is the area within an 1m x 1m boundery, but the area it doesn't need to be square in shape.
100mm x 10000mm also has an area of 1 square metre, and so does 1mm x 1km.

One metre square (not A metre square) always has all four sides of equal length; one metre.

100 metres square measures 100 metres on all four sides but the total area covered is 10,000 square metres = 1 hectare (2.47 acres)

[Loosehead]

Ok Muppit, how do you specify 2d area then if not in square metres, square feet square cubits or whatever?

[SarCaustic]

Muppit - I think the word you're looking for is...Pedantry.
:D

[Muppit]

Loosey Goosey, You define it by it's magnitude and direction as I said!

Metres square, feet square, acres... whatever. You just can't say square metres or square whatevers. It's just wrong, always has been, always will be.

People will still know what you mean. But the people amonst us with nothing better to do than pick holes will always tell you that you are wrong.

Not trying to cause a problem, just answering the bellringer's question!

(Think about our good friend Pyhthagorous, he says the square ON the hypoteneuse and the squares ON the other two sides, definately not OF for this very reason!)

(But only on a right-angled triangle!)

[Muppit]

BTW, thanks Sar.... I love to stir those with a greater vocab than myself!

[tompaine]

You are talking rubbish mup

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

Infact a square metre is exactly the same as a metre squarED or 10 to the 0 or m to the power of two or a metre multiplied by itself

[tompaine]

and confirmation that the square metre is the same as the metre squared.

http://www.bipm.fr/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/ 2-2/2-2-1.html

[kwicky]

Always for clarity use an example. ie 6 square metres, 6 metre squared.

1. 6 square metres.= a length of 6 metres, a height of 1 metre
2. 6 metre squared = a lenth of 6 metres, a height of 6 metres

[Muppit]

OK, I'm not going to argue with BIPM, they know their stuff.

But do you not see my point about metres being a scalar quantity, and therefore only having a magnitude and no direction?

Look it up anywhere, (even the most reliable source of information on Earth.... Wikipedia) and it will tell you this.

I don't doubt that I could be worng, but I do consider myself to be making a very good point.

Surely someone else knows where I'm coming from? HELP!

[fo3nix]

Muppit: I don't understand the relevance of talk of scalar quantities to this discussion. Everything we're talking about here are scalar.

[Muppit]

I see your point, maybe I'm worng talking about Scalar quantities.

I was just trying to explain that a metre is just a length, in one direction. You can't make it square. Which is why it is wrong to talk about square metres.

If it's not the case, and everything I have already said is moronic and wrong, then first of all would everyone please accept my sincerest apologies. But then join me in my stand against scientific stupidity and stop calling metre square, square metres?

Please.

[fo3nix]

But, it's also a square metre, and not a metre square (by definition).

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

[dastardly]

The unit of area, being referred to, is the square metre in the same way that the unit of length is the metre. The term "metre square" ought only be used in the context of a shape which is a square and whose sides are of length 1metre. The pharse "two metres square" has no sense, nor has "two metres squareD". You square numbers, not units - you wouldn't, for example, square a litre. It is not pedantic to distinguish between the phrases "square metre" and "metre square". They mean different things, with the former, "square metre", being the correct unit of area. Hence a rectangle measuring 2m by 5m will have an area of "10 square metres".