Books. Bikes. Boomsticks.
“I only regret that I have but one face to palm for my country.”
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Bad with math...
I sure hope the subroutine in the gas company's software that calculates the bill at Roseholme Cottage is a lot more accurate than the one that calculates the temperature.
"Here at Local Gas Co., Quality is Job #0.9999999799979!"
Add a thousand percent to anything and it looks better (or worse)... Ex. New and improved choco blasts with 1400% more blast! See. Better. or worse. Best!
It may be accurate. Since we don't have any empirical measure of "coldness" we can't comment on their figure.
What temperature would be "twice as cold" as 35 Deg F, for example? Since we don't have a number to define the "coldness" of the 35 degree temperature, we can't multiply or divide it by anything.
We might use the term "half the energy per unit of some mass" but that, I'm guessing, would be somewhere roughly in the minus 250F range. We could divide the number 35 by two and get 17.5, but that's an arbitrary number, signifying nothing. Until you define some (retarded and idiotic) "units of coldness", then claiming "several thousand percent colder" is just as likely to be accurate as not. -- Lyle
DJ, it's three kinds of people: those who understand math, and those who don't.
I recall the book Augustine's Laws, which was a sort of Parkinson's Law applied specifically to DoD R&D and procurement and budgeting. One law had to do with the inadmissability of any figure ending in an integer. In the event that you had a such a number, one could convert it to metric and then back to standard, which would usually return a decent string after the decimal point.
That was, explained Augustine, the source of such uncannily precise statements such as "The aircraft passed within 3.28084 feet of the tower."
Add a thousand percent to anything and it looks better (or worse)...
ReplyDeleteEx. New and improved choco blasts with 1400% more blast!
See. Better. or worse.
Best!
The excessive decimal places are due to extreme precision, not noise.
ReplyDeleteHave faith in Science! Edgar Cayce and his wet cell demand it!
It may be accurate. Since we don't have any empirical measure of "coldness" we can't comment on their figure.
ReplyDeleteWhat temperature would be "twice as cold" as 35 Deg F, for example? Since we don't have a number to define the "coldness" of the 35 degree temperature, we can't multiply or divide it by anything.
We might use the term "half the energy per unit of some mass" but that, I'm guessing, would be somewhere roughly in the minus 250F range. We could divide the number 35 by two and get 17.5, but that's an arbitrary number, signifying nothing. Until you define some (retarded and idiotic) "units of coldness", then claiming "several thousand percent colder" is just as likely to be accurate as not. -- Lyle
Remember, there are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
ReplyDeletedegree days...how much your heat or ac need to be turned on. the 3jillion percent doesn't seem reasonable tho
ReplyDeleteDJ, it's three kinds of people: those who understand math, and those who don't.
ReplyDeleteI recall the book Augustine's Laws, which was a sort of Parkinson's Law applied specifically to DoD R&D and procurement and budgeting. One law had to do with the inadmissability of any figure ending in an integer. In the event that you had a such a number, one could convert it to metric and then back to standard, which would usually return a decent string after the decimal point.
That was, explained Augustine, the source of such uncannily precise statements such as "The aircraft passed within 3.28084 feet of the tower."