Smaller than a Nano.

May 4, 2012

Can a cache be smaller than a Nano? If it is what should we call it? Has anyone seen anything smaller than a Nano?

The prefix pico means 10-12 (nano means 10-9). Even smaller are femto(10-15), atto(10-18), zepto(10-21), and yocto(10-24).

I like those names- what do you think?

4.3k · May 4, 2012

A waste of time?

10.2k · May 4, 2012

A waste of time?

Cute thread, but it's probably going to go where I'm quoting above. :laughing:

Yes, being an engineer, I'm familiar with all those prefixes from the ol' school days. As a matter of fact, I've been stressing the importance of knowing and working with scientific notation to the pharmicist wanna-be daughter.

P.S. micros should have been millis all along, and nanos would have been micros. :blink:

Edited May 4, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

May 4, 2012

Can a cache be smaller than a Nano? If it is what should we call it? Has anyone seen anything smaller than a Nano?

The prefix pico means 10-12 (nano means 10-9). Even smaller are femto(10-15), atto(10-18), zepto(10-21), and yocto(10-24).

I like those names- what do you think?

If you take the word nano literally then yes

What we use the term nano as is a cache smaller than a micro- usually those small magnetic things.

If you can make a cache in any of those smaller sizes I'd love to see it (and possibly buy it )

May 4, 2012

call it a lot of work replacing logs.

Edited May 4, 2012 by Great Scott!

May 4, 2012

I can't say id be interested in finding anything smaller than a nano.... A matchhead sized cache.... No thanks

Edited May 4, 2012 by Vonnegut1982

May 4, 2012

Sounds like the Marx brothers!

Groundspeak is having a hard enough time adding the pico size (which I consider anything smaller than a bison tube) I don't think the smaller sizes will ever show up here.

I think if there was anything smaller than a pico, I would not look for them.

May 4, 2012

A nano, in my opinion, is anything small enough to hold a log and nothing else. So anything smaller, and no log, thus no geocache.

8.6k · May 4, 2012

Think about who this is directed at....... masses of people who hardly care about technical differences of micro, nano, pico, etc., etc., or even more etc.

3k · May 4, 2012

A waste of time?

+1000

May 4, 2012

A waste of time?

+1

May 4, 2012

OK, I get that most people generally don't like small caches. Me too. But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

2.7k · May 4, 2012

OK, I get that most people generally don't like small caches. Me too. But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

I was quite content with nano sized caches being in the same size classification as micros. I really don't understand a need for a size classification smaller than nano. I'm more than happy calling anything nano sized and smaller a nano.

2.8k · May 4, 2012

OK, I get that most people generally don't like small caches. Me too. But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

A local hid a small plastic bead (~1/4" diameter). There was a teeny bit of paper rolled up to fit in the hole of it. I don't think it lasted - it wasn't waterproof at all.

3.6k · May 4, 2012

I can think a few things to make a cache so small that nobody can find it. Its too evil and won't do it. Don't ask me what they are because I don't wanna be the one searching for them.

May 4, 2012

I LOVE nanos. I sometimes run out of ball bearings for my wrist-rocket slingshot. Nanos are a perfectly acceptable replacement. Only drawback is.. after sending every one of them I finally DO find into the furthest reaches of hell, I have to go online and log a "needs maintenance". Most times its worth it. Something smaller might not work as well.

Before the angst piles up so deep I can't get online, please be aware I am just joking. :lol:

5.6k · May 4, 2012

But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

Yes, years ago I found a micro that was a animal ID capsule - the log was about 1/3 the size of the "standard" namo.

2.5k · May 4, 2012

Can a cache be smaller than a Nano? If it is what should we call it? Has anyone seen anything smaller than a Nano?

The prefix pico means 10^-12 (nano means 10^-9). Even smaller are femto(10^-15), atto(10^-18), zepto(10^-21), and yocto(10^-24).

I like those names- what do you think?

For anyone else who scratched their heads when they read the OP, have another cup of coffee :omnomnom:

and then read it again, with the "superscript" tags used. :cool:

2.8k · May 4, 2012

I always thought Zepto was one of the Marx Brothers.

Along with Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Karl.

May 4, 2012

I LOVE nanos. I sometimes run out of ball bearings for my wrist-rocket slingshot. Nanos are a perfectly acceptable replacement. Only drawback is.. after sending every one of them I finally DO find into the furthest reaches of hell, I have to go online and log a "needs maintenance". Most times its worth it. Something smaller might not work as well.

:laughing: I liked it better BEFORE I was sure you were joking!

May 4, 2012

OK, I get that most people generally don't like small caches. Me too. But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

Only those little plastic preform type things. I guess the dog ID tube would be similar to that. 1.5-2ml containers.

Any smaller and I'm not sure you could fit a log book in.

3.2k · May 4, 2012

I've seen some tiny pop-top plastic containers used that I've heard refered to as picos. They are taller, but narrower than the standard nano blinkie.

3.6k · May 4, 2012

But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

Yes, years ago I found a micro that was a animal ID capsule - the log was about 1/3 the size of the "standard" namo.

I see them around.

Good luck!

Yes, you will be thinking of pain.

Edit to add, you can cut off the top of the ID capsule and make it smaller. :laughing:

Edited May 4, 2012 by SwineFlew

7.8k · May 4, 2012

I've seen some tiny pop-top plastic containers used that I've heard refered to as picos. They are taller, but narrower than the standard nano blinkie.

These?

$(KGrHqZHJ!0E63RuD!RWBO1Y2QBFt!~~60_35.JPG

I find that because they're taller than a blinky, the log sheet can be wider and is easier to work with. I've never hidden any, but I've found many.

3.6k · May 4, 2012

I've seen some tiny pop-top plastic containers used that I've heard refered to as picos. They are taller, but narrower than the standard nano blinkie.

These?

I find that because they're taller than a blinky, the log sheet can be wider and is easier to work with. I've never hidden any, but I've found many.

They get wet easy. I got a few to hide. :lol:

1.1k · May 4, 2012

A waste of time?

+1000

+1001

19k · May 4, 2012

OK, I get that most people generally don't like small caches. Me too. But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

You mean, like these?

3.4k · May 4, 2012

I've seen some tiny pop-top plastic containers used that I've heard refered to as picos. They are taller, but narrower than the standard nano blinkie.

These?

I find that because they're taller than a blinky, the log sheet can be wider and is easier to work with. I've never hidden any, but I've found many.

They get wet easy. I got a few to hide.

I've stopped hiding them. They leak and the caps break off. Initially useful for hiding in very tight places, they have required too much maint.

38.2k · May 4, 2012

There is nothing smaller than a micro at the moment.

7.7k · May 4, 2012

OK, I get that most people generally don't like small caches. Me too. But I still ask you this. Have you seen any caches that would be smaller than a Nano? By Nano I mean the standard magnetic sized ones.

I've seen (almost) 2 dimensional ones, that would probably be smaller than a nano if you go by volume.

7.7k · May 4, 2012

They get wet easy.

I'm shocked, shocked, that no one has mentioned yet...

"Not if you hide them in an ammo can"

May 4, 2012

I LOVE nanos. I sometimes run out of ball bearings for my wrist-rocket slingshot. Nanos are a perfectly acceptable replacement. Only drawback is.. after sending every one of them I finally DO find into the furthest reaches of hell, I have to go online and log a "needs maintenance". Most times its worth it. Something smaller might not work as well.

Before the angst piles up so deep I can't get online, please be aware I am just joking.

Bwaaha!

Edited May 4, 2012 by stldenise

1.6k · May 4, 2012

I've seen some tiny pop-top plastic containers used that I've heard refered to as picos. They are taller, but narrower than the standard nano blinkie.

I think thoose are blood tubes: used in medical labs to test blood samples, like this

http://www.amazon.com/BrandTech-Plastic-PCR-Tube-Flat/dp/B004PLME54/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_t_1

No?

Edited May 4, 2012 by ras_oscar

7.7k · May 4, 2012

I think thoose are blood tubes: used in medical labs to test blood samples, like this

http://www.amazon.com/BrandTech-Plastic-PCR-Tube-Flat/dp/B004PLME54/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_t_1

No?

Cool! 1000 for $54. I'll create my own power trail, and call it the Blood Trail!

Since today is Star Wars Day (May the 4th be with you...), allow me to quote from Vader : "Noooooooooo!!!!!"

May 4, 2012

I have to wonder if Moore's law should really apply to geocaching?

6k · May 4, 2012

Can a cache be smaller than a Nano? If it is what should we call it? Has anyone seen anything smaller than a Nano?

The prefix pico means 10-12 (nano means 10-9). Even smaller are femto(10-15), atto(10-18), zepto(10-21), and yocto(10-24).

I like those names- what do you think?

It's a micro which is defined as the size of a 35 mm container or smaller. Since Nano doesn't exist officially you cant even call it that

19k · May 4, 2012

I have to wonder if Moore's law should really apply to geocaching?

The Moore the Merrier?

May 4, 2012

I have to wonder if Moore's law should really apply to geocaching?

The Moore the Merrier?

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters. I'm sure everyone in the "getting started" forum would enjoy answering questions such as:

"whats a ml?"

"how many ml is my lock-n-lock?"

"Is it 'liter' or 'litre'"?

"how many liters is an ammo can"

"whats a ml?"

15.4k · May 4, 2012

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters.

You mean like the Geocaching 101 page does (in the "What does a geocache look like?" section)?

Micro - Less than 100ml. Examples: a 35 mm film canister or a tiny storage box typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet. A nano cache is a common sub-type of a micro cache that is less than 10ml and can only hold a small logsheet.
Small - 100ml or larger, but less than 1L. Example: A sandwich-sized plastic container or similar.

Regular - 1L or larger, but less than 20L. Examples: a plastic container or ammo can about the size of a shoebox.

Large - 20L or larger. Example: A large bucket.

Other - See the cache description for information.

I'm sure everyone in the "getting started" forum would enjoy answering questions such as:
"whats a ml?"

"how many ml is my lock-n-lock?"

"Is it 'liter' or 'litre'"?

"how many liters is an ammo can"

"whats a ml?"

And of course, we could point them to Google:

https://www.google.com/search?q=10ml+in+oz

https://www.google.com/search?q=100ml+in+oz

https://www.google.com/search?q=1L+in+oz

https://www.google.com/search?q=20L+in+oz

Edited May 4, 2012 by niraD

7.7k · May 4, 2012

I have to wonder if Moore's law should really apply to geocaching?

The Moore the Merrier?

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters. I'm sure everyone in the "getting started" forum would enjoy answering questions such as:

"whats a ml?"

"how many ml is my lock-n-lock?"

"Is it 'liter' or 'litre'"?

"how many liters is an ammo can"

"whats a ml?"

That's about the metric system and nothing to do with Moore's Law (and the pedantic will insist it is not a law to begin with).

Moore's Law as it applies to geocaching will state that the number of geocaches will double every (insert period here) while shrinking in size.

May 4, 2012

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters.
You mean like the Geocaching 101 page does (in the "What does a geocache look like?" section)?
Micro - Less than 100ml. Examples: a 35 mm film canister or a tiny storage box typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet. A nano cache is a common sub-type of a micro cache that is less than 10ml and can only hold a small logsheet.
Small - 100ml or larger, but less than 1L. Example: A sandwich-sized plastic container or similar.

Regular - 1L or larger, but less than 20L. Examples: a plastic container or ammo can about the size of a shoebox.

Large - 20L or larger. Example: A large bucket.

Other - See the cache description for information.

Exactly - but listing the size more directly without the use of terms like "micro", "small", "regular", "large", etc.

What's a ml again, is that bigger or smaller than just a "L"?

1.8k · May 4, 2012

Since today is Star Wars Day (May the 4th be with you...), allow me to quote from Vader : "Noooooooooo!!!!!"

Literally the funniest thing I've heard all day. I actually heard it in his voice as I read it.

And I am in desperate need of a laugh! Thx

May 5, 2012

I have to wonder if Moore's law should really apply to geocaching?

The Moore the Merrier?

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters. I'm sure everyone in the "getting started" forum would enjoy answering questions such as:

"whats a ml?"

"how many ml is my lock-n-lock?"

"Is it 'liter' or 'litre'"?

"how many liters is an ammo can"

"whats a ml?"

That's about the metric system and nothing to do with Moore's Law (and the pedantic will insist it is not a law to begin with).

Moore's Law as it applies to geocaching will state that the number of geocaches will double every (insert period here) while shrinking in size.

Yeah, I started talking about Moore's law - the continual shrink of geocaches (micros used to be crazy-small, now, they are kind of average, and we're talking about even smaller caches) coupled with the growth in the number of caches kind of feels the same.

But it seemed funnier, as I went on, to joke about the generally poor understanding of the metric system in the US.

May 5, 2012

7.9k · May 5, 2012

Smaller than a nano, is a pico.

Lots of takes on that subject.

A FROBRO class micro, is a pico. Mostly that type of cache is no longer allowed since the container was way too small for a log you could actually sign. The concept was to send the CO a message telling them what the image was inside the container.

May 5, 2012

A cache based on RFID could be incredibly tiny.

8k · May 5, 2012

I have to wonder if Moore's law should really apply to geocaching?

The Moore the Merrier?

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters. I'm sure everyone in the "getting started" forum would enjoy answering questions such as:

"whats a ml?"

"how many ml is my lock-n-lock?"

"Is it 'liter' or 'litre'"?

"how many liters is an ammo can"

"whats a ml?"

I've always liked the definition of a nano as anything smaller than 1 barn-megaparsec.

7.7k · May 5, 2012

I've always liked the definition of a nano as anything smaller than 1 barn-megaparsec.

Once again the forums has proved to be an unexpected source of trivial knowledge that, while unlikely to be of use in real life, is extremely entertaining. Thanks, Toz! I had to google this to find out that it is

6.7k · May 5, 2012

call it a lot of work replacing logs.

What he said.

1.2k · May 5, 2012

Perhaps we should just rate cache sizes by volume in liters or milliliters.
You mean like the Geocaching 101 page does (in the "What does a geocache look like?" section)?
Micro - Less than 100ml. Examples: a 35 mm film canister or a tiny storage box typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet. A nano cache is a common sub-type of a micro cache that is less than 10ml and can only hold a small logsheet.
Small - 100ml or larger, but less than 1L. Example: A sandwich-sized plastic container or similar.

Regular - 1L or larger, but less than 20L. Examples: a plastic container or ammo can about the size of a shoebox.

Large - 20L or larger. Example: A large bucket.

Other - See the cache description for information.

Exactly - but listing the size more directly without the use of terms like "micro", "small", "regular", "large", etc.

What's a ml again, is that bigger or smaller than just a "L"?

There's also the questions: "Is an "l" the same as an "L"? Is an "ml" the same as an "ML"? Does capitalization change the value of "L"? Or was it "l"?"

Smaller than a Nano.

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation