this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
1202 points (99.0% liked)
memes
10191 readers
2178 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 !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
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.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Original post is not linearly interpolating but exponentially.
this comic uses a log scale (I extrapolate this from the only two data points given).
(apologies for pedantry) This can't be the case, as the zero point is visible in the graph and even gets crossed to the negatives. Log scale graphs only show positive values and place zero infinitely below the horizontal axis.
If that were the case, the y-axis label would be log(NUMBER OF HUSBANDS), no?
It's a choice, it's not mandatory to use a log on your y axis when you plot a log.
load more comments
(1 replies)
New data point in 3...2...
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".
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.
load more comments
(3 replies)
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,
It's cold today, so much for climate change 🧐
Close, if you'd instead called it global warming I'd have bought it
Dammit, we're on a cooling trajectory, prepare for a new ice age and the approach to absolute zero by end of year
Huge if true!
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:
It looks like he aged 5 years in 3 months...
Someone's clearly not a parent.
Oh oh, don't tell me, I'll guess! It's the baby, right? The baby's not a parent?
You are correct
Babies grow super fast.
I was talking about the dad, lol.
I should have been more specific given they are both male.
Oh, yeah. That makes a lot more sense! And that's what being kept up every night for months will do to you.
To be fair, the lighting conditions are way more flattering in the first pic. When you have even lighting all over your front, it minimizes wrinkles. The second pic seems like it was taken in the evening with only one light source (or a few...but it seems like maybe an overhead porch light), making wrinkles and such far more prominent.
As a parent with a kid who didn't sleep well I knew what you meant lol
As a father I can confirm this seems right
Why is the wreath still there?
3 months of chronic sleep deprivation
How're the kids?
Do we tell him?
It's not his?
That's Maury's job, not ours.
That it’s not Christmas anymore?
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
Line goes up. Can't refute that!
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.
Plot twist: the bio-dad is actually either Galactus or Ego.
7.5 trillion pound coins is a lot, I wonder how much they weigh.
Math checks out.
TWICE!
Mafs by mafks
view more: next ›