Assume v. Presume

Trev said:
It {the asteroid} will pass closest to the Earth at 20:32GMT today coming twice as close to the Earth as the moon.

On Jan 24, an asteroid {snip} flew by Earth, coming 30 per cent closer to our planet than the moon.
Click to expand...
The first is horrible and shouldn't be allowed, the second can just about get away with it.
 
Twice as close means half the distance, simple.

(Dons devil's advocate hat. Thanks, Don!)
 
Sow why don't they just say that to make it totally unambiguous? I worked out what it meant, but it's a horrible convolution of the English language.
The moon is about 250,000 miles distant. Twice that is 500,000 miles. Twice = double = two times, and thus if a number is given (distance in this case) then the number must be doubled to come up with the answer. Basic maths.:rolling:

Similarly, the unambiguous rendition of "30% closer...." is "at a distance of 70% of that from the Earth to the moon".
 
Trev said:
Sow why don't they just say that to make it totally unambiguous? I worked out what it meant, but it's a horrible convolution of the English language.
The moon is about 250,000 miles distant. Twice that is 500,000 miles. Twice = double = two times, and thus if a number is given (distance in this case) then the number must be doubled to come up with the answer. Basic maths.:rolling:

Similarly, the unambiguous rendition of "30% closer...." is "at a distance of 70% of that from the Earth to the moon".
Click to expand...
The moon is between 225 and 250 thousand miles from earth, centre to centre. Given an earth radius of 4000 and moon radius of 1000 miles, that puts the distance of the moon from earth's surface at between 220 and 245 thousand miles. Start from there!

But do some people reckon distance from earth means from its centre?:p

*(Not to scale) :rolling:

asteroid-1-1.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently, according to the How Do They Do It? Turbo Special I'm watching, "military helicopters are infinitely more complicated than ordinary helicopters" :rolleyes:
 
Black Hole said:
Apparently, according to the How Do They Do It? Turbo Special I'm watching, "military helicopters are infinitely more complicated than ordinary helicopters" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
But according to Wiktionary, infinite has comparatives, too!
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/infinite

Ok, in maths there are degrees of infinity, but that's not what is claimed here.

Edit: Dictionaries seem to define infinitely as meaning very much, so your objection is invalid.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't care what the dictionaries say!!!!

We all know that the complexity of one helicopter cannot be infinitely greater than another, even if the stupidity of uneducated hyperbole has degraded the term in common parlance (and as I have explained many times before, dictionaries record how language is actually used, not how it ought to be used). AvP is supposed to be a rallying flag against that sort of thing, not in support of it.

So infinite is no longer infinite, and a quantum is no longer the smallest thing imaginable. Sigh.
 
Black Hole said:
I don't care what the dictionaries say!!!!

We all know that the complexity of one helicopter cannot be infinitely greater than another, even if the stupidity of uneducated hyperbole has degraded the term in common parlance (and as I have explained many times before, dictionaries record how language is actually used, not how it ought to be used). AvP is supposed to be a rallying flag against that sort of thing, not in support of it.

So infinite is no longer infinite, and a quantum is no longer the smallest thing imaginable. Sigh.
Click to expand...

A set S is infinite if there exists a bijection of S onto a proper subset U of S.

Define infinite complexity and we can continue the discussion!

And quanta are not and never have been anything to do with being smallest. E=hν. ν can be as large as you like. A quantum could have the energy of a galaxy.
 
Black Hole said:
as I have explained many times before, dictionaries record how language is actually used, not how it ought to be used). AvP is supposed to be a rallying flag against that sort of thing, not in support of it
Click to expand...
Have to agree with that.
The continual efforts to impress, particularly by the press and latterly on social media, have resulted in misuse and overuse of superlatives to the extent that most are meaningless in day-to-day communication. The result of course is that it's almost impossible to indicate or understand that something special actually is, and we end up in a sea of apparent mediocrity.
 
Your Highness

Lord High Chancellor

Lord Great Chamberlain

Lord High Steward

Lord High Treasurer

Lord High Constable

Lord High Admiral

The Right Honourable

The Right Reverend

Great Britain

Grand Squire of France

Master of the Horse

Pages of Honour

Master of the Queen's Music

Her Majesty

Almighty God

Hyperbole indeed, but hardly a result of social media!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If "infinite" is now accepted to mean "not infinite", what would you say if you really mean "infinite"? "Literally infinite" ain't gonna work, because "literally" now means "not literally"!
 
Mike0001 said:
And quanta are not and never have been anything to do with being smallest. E=hν. ν can be as large as you like. A quantum could have the energy of a galaxy.
Click to expand...
Can't agree with that, unless you can find two real (not theoretical) adjacent energy states which are the energy of a galaxy apart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top