Yes because 3 km is equal to 3000 m.3 km = 3 km * 1000 m/1 km = 3000 m
--> 1 km = 1000 m --> 1/1000 km = m --> 10^-3 km = m Suppose you are given 3 m and are asked to convert it to km. Just follow: --> 3 x 10^-3 km. --> 0.003 km.
3 km are in 3000 m.
1 km = 1,000 m 2 km = 2,000 m 3 km = 3,000 m . . . 51 km = 51,000 m 51.42 km = 51,420 m
1,000 m = 1 km 2,000 m = 2 km 3,000 m = 3 km 6,000 m = 6 km 9,000 m = 9 km.
Yes because 3 km is equal to 3000 m.3 km = 3 km * 1000 m/1 km = 3000 m
4000 m is greater than 3 km.4000 m = 4 km > 3 km
--> 1 km = 1000 m --> 1/1000 km = m --> 10^-3 km = m Suppose you are given 3 m and are asked to convert it to km. Just follow: --> 3 x 10^-3 km. --> 0.003 km.
3 km = 3000 mTo convert from km to m, multiply by 1000.
3 km are in 3000 m.
3 km = 3000 mTo convert from km to m, multiply by 1000.
3 km = 3000 mTo convert from km to m, multiply by 1000.
1 km = 1,000 m 2 km = 2,000 m 3 km = 3,000 m . . . 51 km = 51,000 m 51.42 km = 51,420 m
It is: 3 km = 3000 m
1,000 m = 1 km 2,000 m = 2 km 3,000 m = 3 km . . . 9,000 m = 9 km
1,000 m = 1 km 2,000 m = 2 km 3,000 m = 3 km 6,000 m = 6 km 9,000 m = 9 km.
Well, isn't that a happy little question! Yes, 3 km is longer than 2900 m. You see, 1 km is equal to 1000 m, so 3 km would be 3000 m, which is indeed longer than 2900 m. Just a little math magic to brighten your day!