Timeline for "Thirty times weaker": Using a multiplier to describe the lack of something
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 2014 at 21:56 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | 'Bad English' meaning 'English that is agreed (by authorities I can quote) to be incorrect' or 'English that I really wish wasn't used, but is, and so I just have to accept it when other people use it'? | |
| Aug 24, 2014 at 19:58 | comment | added | Frank | Ignoring the Richter scale, as it's logarithmic, and using a linear scale I don't see the problem, stronger is S=nx, weaker is W=n/x. If your starting point is 5, S=nx = S=5(30) = 150, W=n/x = W=5/30 = 1/6. The difference between S & W where x is the same is always x^2. I think that works for longer/shorter, taller/smaller, fatter/thinner and any positive/negative pair. | |
| Aug 24, 2014 at 18:55 | comment | added | fdb | If the first earthquake is at point x on the Richter scale, then, if the second earthquake is at y points, and “thirty times stronger”, y will be 31 times x. To say that the former is “thirty times weaker” than the latter does not make sense mathematically. Thirty times what? | |
| Aug 24, 2014 at 18:33 | comment | added | Frank | What's the difference (the only measure, I suppose, in English is grammatically cos the spelling is OK) between 30 times stronger and 30 times weaker? | |
| Aug 24, 2014 at 17:04 | history | answered | fdb | CC BY-SA 3.0 |