this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
1201 points (98.9% liked)

memes

10286 readers
2512 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aceticon 67 points 7 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Doubling every three months is an exponential interpolation and not a linear one!

[–] Aceticon 19 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

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".

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Aceticon -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

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^

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't matter if you divide ln(2) or x by three, it's the same thing.

[–] Beldarofremulak 1 points 7 months ago

Get a room you two

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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".

[–] Telodzrum 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)
[–] Aceticon 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

One of the best mathematical stories from ancient times, IMHO,

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's cold today, so much for climate change 🧐

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

Close, if you'd instead called it global warming I'd have bought it

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Dammit, we're on a cooling trajectory, prepare for a new ice age and the approach to absolute zero by end of year