The difference between you and the people this meme is about is you understand that both space or no space are fine.
For more context, I was trained to use a space between a number and its unit (e.g. 2 mol, 3 g, 1 M) for scientific writing. This includes the % sign when it follows a number (i.e. 100 %). So percent yields would be reported as 78 % instead of 78%. On the flip side, units that contain the % sign would not use a space. For example, mol% and wt% would not use a space to separate the % sign from the rest of the unit (i.e. 2 mol%).
Since I was taught this from the very beginning of university, I never really questioned where the convention came from. Now, I work for a PI who does not use the space for %. Every time I write something (presentations, manuscripts, etc.), they clarify that % is a mathematical operator so there is no space. After a search to defend my position, I found the SI brochure from the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures that clearly states the use of a space.
Recently in group meeting, while talking about something kind of related to units, they said that I believe there should be a space for %. I quickly clarified (and showed the SI brochure as evidence) that I do not “believe” there should be a space; this isn’t something I have created in my mind. Finally, they said that since it is their lab any manuscripts must follow their convention. Now when I write, I write my way and change it when I self edit before sending it to my PI.
JayleneSlide@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Let’s not forget that it’s also the symbol for modulo operation. So many opportunities for ambiguity!
DozensOfDonner@mander.xyz 17 hours ago
I thought they meant modulo actually
martinborgen@piefed.social 8 hours ago
At first glance I thought it was a joke about how programmers use modulo as an operator, while mathematicians use it as a relations thing. I never really understood the way the mathematicians use it tbh