In a scientific article, should I write "3m", "3 m", "3 meters", or "3 [meters]"?

  • None of the above - go with 3 m (using a thin space between number and unit). – Toby Speight Mar 17 at 17:23

This guide at the NIST site is a good place to start.

In particular, you should write "3 m" as in "The bar is 3 m long."

| improve this answer | |
  • I've edited the answer to answer the particular question (feel free to revert if necessary), but yes, the guide is great as a reference for all unit issues. – ShreevatsaR Mar 12 '11 at 8:12

The abbreviation for meter is m; it is not written between brackets, and you need to add a space between the value and the measuring unit.

The absence of brackets, and the presence of a space to separate the measuring unit from the numeric value is not limited to meter, but it is common for all the measuring units.

| improve this answer | |

Quoting from Wikipedia:

The value of a quantity is written as a number followed by a space (representing a multiplication sign) and a unit symbol; e.g., "2.21 kg", "7.3×102 m2", "22 K".

This rule explicitly includes the percent sign (%). Exceptions are the symbols for plane angular degrees, minutes and seconds (°, ′ and ″), which are placed immediately after the number with no intervening space.

So three meters should be written as 3 m.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.