Math checks out.
this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
1201 points (98.9% liked)
memes
14757 readers
3266 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
TWICE!
There's another problem that his math missed. His baby-making rate stands at one per three months. Extrapolating that for all humans puts the population's doubling rate at EVERY THREE MONTHS! In 10 years, there will be a lot of ~3 trillion kg kids!
If every 10 billion people can make a new earth every year, I think we should be able to get on top of this.
Why does he mispronounce his surname?
Could be German. It's not pronounced precisely like "Kyle", but close enough, and "Keil" is the German word for "wedge".
-
How is size ("big") even associated with mass ("weight") in this relation?
-
What is a "pounds"?
They're making the (possibly false) assumption that density will stay the same, so size must grow with weight.
Of course, it's equally likely that size will remain constant. It changes or it doesn't -> 50/50 odds. Until the point it all collapses into a black hole.
If you've ever seen a growth chart, you know that newborns grow incredibly quickly, but the rate of growth tapers off over time. That being said, my daughter will be six feet tall by the time she's 2:
Mafs by mafks
Plot twist: the bio-dad is actually either Galactus or Ego.
Why is the wreath still there?
3 months of chronic sleep deprivation
How're the kids?
7.5 trillion pound coins is a lot, I wonder how much they weigh.
His son's face looks like that's not the first time dad tell that joke.
"i've heard that before, dad."
3 month milestone: baby is so over it
Neatly showing why when all you have is two data points you can't just assume the best fit function for extrapolation is a linear one.
Mind you, a surprisingly large number of political comments is anchored in exactly that logic.
Doubling every three months is an exponential interpolation and not a linear one!
Good point and well spotted!
PS: Though it's not actually called exponential (as it isn't e^nr-3-month-periods^ but rather 2^nr-3-month-periods^ ) but has a different name which I can't recall anymore.
PPS: Found it - it's a "geometric progression".
PPS: Found it - it’s a “geometric progression”.
A terminology that I learned from the Terminator 2 movie. Only that was, I think, a "geometric rate".
Chessboard and wheat
One of the best mathematical stories from ancient times, IMHO,
By tweaking a few parameters you can turn every base into any other base for exponentials. Just use e^(ln(b)*x)
PS: The formula here would be e^(ln(2)/3*X) and x is the number of months. So the behavior it's exponential in nature.
By that definition you can turn any linear function a * x + b, "exponential" by making it e^ln(a*x +b) even though it's actually linear (you can do it to anything, including sin() or even ln() itself, which would make per that definition the inverse of exponential "exponential").
Essentially you're just doing f(f^-1^(g(x))) and then saying "f(m) is e^m^ so if I make m = ln(g(x)) then g(x) is exponential"
Also the correct formula in your example would be e^(ln(2)*X/3) since the original formula if X denotes months is 2^X/3^
It doesn't matter if you divide ln(2) or x by three, it's the same thing.
Get a room you two
It's cold today, so much for climate change 🧐
Dammit, we're on a cooling trajectory, prepare for a new ice age and the approach to absolute zero by end of year
Close, if you'd instead called it global warming I'd have bought it
view more: next ›