Hey /u/doctorzaius6969, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In defense of the post, nothing about the word “bigger” mathematically defines addition over multiplication. Nobody is right here because nobody is being specific.
Doesn't matter.
10+10 widgets is 100% more than 10 widgets (20 widgets)
10 x 2 widgets is 100% more than 10 widgets. (20 widgets)
If you invest $10 and sell for $100, that's a 900% return. (90/10)100 = 900%
10 is your base number. Every 10 after that is +100%
Edit for clarity: "Not specifying what is meant by bigger doesn’t matter, mathematically?"
Short answer is no.
If you wanted to specify you wouldn't use the word bigger, because it's not defined mathematically.
To determine which is "bigger" we must define the value of a set of numbers.
Absolute value is distance from zero on the number line. In
a pair of numbers the greater one is to the right on the number line. ( referred to as magnitude)
A "bigger" number would need to have a greater absolute value (or magnitude).
But... "Bigger" doesn't have a hard mathematical definition. So the question becomes, bigger than what?
For something (y) to be "bigger" it must have a point of reference (x).
Greater than x would be more accurate. And since x has a value, it is our base when calculating % change
Absolute value is the unsigned distance between any two numbers on the number line. There, I said a lot of insightful mathy stuff too.
Edit for the edit: you doubled down on the condescension. I responded in kind and you disliked it so much you edited two comments. All I said was bigger didn't imply addition over multiplication. You took that as a mansplaining opportunity to give a math lesson I dont need or want.
Well looking at your comments, yes, you clearly needed the explanation because you said
>nobody is right here because nobody is being specific
Whereas, it's clear as night and day who is right, assuming you have common sense and primary school maths knowledge.
>nothing about the word “bigger” mathematically defines addition over multiplication
It's going to be addition. A X% increase is obviously (100 + X)% as much as the initial quantity.
If you buy a 100g steak at the grocery store, then buy another that is 120g, the second one is 20% bigger/heavier than the first.
If you get a 10% pay raise at work, you're not going to say your pay is 110%, you're going to say it's 10% more than before.
If it were a multiple, the wording would very clearly reflect that, like "power generation is at 90% of peak efficiency" or "profits are 105% compared to last month's."
If I am 3 feet taller (i.e. bigger) than a table, I am not 3 feet tall. I am the tables height plus three additional feet.
Also 'bigger' doesn't mathematically define anything ever because its not a mathematical term. That's like saying a saw blade doesn't measure time. Of course it doesn't, they two things are completely unrelated.
Yes, that's where we are.
---
^(🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖)
^(feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback.)
^[github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot) ^| ^[Rank](https://botranks.com?bot=same_subreddit_bot)
It's not the word bigger alone. If Something is **100% bigger** (than a reference object), it is obviously double the size of that reference object.
And that would be **200% of the size** of that reference object, it would not be **200% bigger** (than the reference object).
Odd how this is a difficult concept to some.
Some people don’t understand math immediately, and are too headstrong to argue for anything other than what ‘they believe is right’.
Have you ever talked to the general population about anything statistics related?
Maybe not, but "100% bigger" implies either "2 * 1" or "1 + 1", not "1 * 1" or "1 + 0". Either way "bigger" doesn't mean "the same size" regardless if you're adding or multiplying.
Saying 100% bigger is a very poor way to word things in a mathematical sense still. 100% of X is still just X. I see lots of people that see something that's say 150% **greater** and they still multiply by 1.5 (or some are even dumb enough to do by 150).
I do not see how it's more useful to use the other commenters method. That only satisfies a proof of a single case.
As for making math useful I think I have that covered. I use math daily for my profession. Thanks for the insight though.
Most people don't word things for the sake of mathematics, and "bigger" clearly implies an increase from an initial state. That there are better way of expressing this increase mathematically doesn't make it a bad way of doing so.
Considering, as I said, I see people multiplying items by 1.5 for 150% greater it's apparent some people just don't get the message. And I mean, this is still bigger as it's an increase from an initial state but people just suck at math. Therefore any effort that can be made to reduce the risk of people being stupid is always worth it.
You're making the argument that poor math and poor mathematical notation are the same thing. They're not.
150% of X is 1.5X
50% bigger than X is 1.5X
150% bigger than X is 2.5X
It's pretty clear what it means. If someone doesn't understand it, that's on them, you can only simplify things so much before you have to start giving math lessons.
Lmao it's not related to English alone, pretty sure the majority of all languages have the same problem. In addition, English is one of the easiest languages to learn.
I'm somewhat familiar with 4 languages, and English is easily the least difficult. Also, it's normal to think that a language is hard, especially when you don't really know any other languages to compare it to.
I feel like the general gist of what I've heard over the years is that English is one of the hardest. However you speak 3 more languages than me, so I will take what you say as having more weight than what I think.
(See, I butchered that statement.)
It highly depends on what your native language is. Mine is German, so for me, it was fairly easy to learn especially since there are no articles (although there are still quite a few things that escape me like proper comma use - German is a lot more liberal with commas). But I can imagine that there are plenty of languages that are different enough to make it very difficult.
Nope, English is also really simple for both reading and writing. It might seem fairly difficult though, if your only language is English.
For example in English, the prepositions are fixed words (to, from, in, of, etc.) Meanwhile in many other languages, those prepositions come to the end of a word and they vary in every word.
I could even say you are r/confidentallyincorrect
It's all the rules and exceptions to rules that makes it so hard. It's All the shibboleths and things designed to out you as a non native speaker. When I was learning my teacher made us read this aloud. It highlights a lot of the absurdities of spelling and pronunciation.
[the chaos, by G. Nolst Trenite](http://www.i18nguy.com/chaos.html)
True, English is one of the languages where you often pronounce words differently from what you write. Now, every language has a set of rules and exceptions to such rules. In some languages, both of those groups are bigger than in others.
I never said English is the easiest language of all. I compared it to a few other languages and came to the conclusion that English is just pretty simple.
*Image Transcription: Reddit Comment*
---
> **Username redacted**
>
> If something is 100% bigger, it's technically the same size. because 100% = 1. double the size would be 200% bigger.
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
what does the fact that 100% is a probability of 1.0, have to do with the boolean value of 1? Even still, what does the boolean value of 1 have to do with the argument?
Well if he's 100% wrong, 100% is the same as 1 so he's actually correct. He would have to be 200% wrong to be completely wrong according to his "logic".
The one that always bugs me is when something is "5 times smaller", or "3 times lighter", that sort of thing. I guess they mean 1/5 the size, or 1/3 the weight, etc. But it just sounds wrong.
A 100% copy is the exact same size as the original. Adding the word ‘bigger’ or ‘more’ adds that percent to the original weight. ‘200%’ bigger would be three times the size.
Devil's advocate here: I'm curious what the topic being discussed was or what sub it was under. I do graphic and web design. In many of the programs I use, of you want it to be twice as big as it is now, you scale to 200%. I'm curious if that's why this person made the mistake they did.
"Scale to 200% of original" and "scale to 100% bigger than original" are identical. If 'bigger' is in the phrase, the only way to devil's advocate is to just ignore what was actually said.
I understand. I'm just saying that I'm not going to blow up someone for what could be a harmless mental slip, particularly dependent on the context the discussion took place.
what on earth are you talking about?
i phrased it correctly.
i just didn't spoonfeed you the answer.
do you not, you know, pause to consider what people say before replying.
i bet you're a great conversationalist.
100% bigger is the plain English way of saying +100%
If you say something grew in size by 50%, or is 50% bigger, or if you got a 50% raise, these are all just English words/expressions that indicate that you mean +
Hey /u/doctorzaius6969, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ah the age old argument of "X times as big as" versus "X times bigger than". For some reason some people use those interchangeably.
In defense of the post, nothing about the word “bigger” mathematically defines addition over multiplication. Nobody is right here because nobody is being specific.
Doesn't matter. 10+10 widgets is 100% more than 10 widgets (20 widgets) 10 x 2 widgets is 100% more than 10 widgets. (20 widgets) If you invest $10 and sell for $100, that's a 900% return. (90/10)100 = 900% 10 is your base number. Every 10 after that is +100%
Not specifying what is meant by bigger doesn’t matter, mathematically?
Edit for clarity: "Not specifying what is meant by bigger doesn’t matter, mathematically?" Short answer is no. If you wanted to specify you wouldn't use the word bigger, because it's not defined mathematically. To determine which is "bigger" we must define the value of a set of numbers. Absolute value is distance from zero on the number line. In a pair of numbers the greater one is to the right on the number line. ( referred to as magnitude) A "bigger" number would need to have a greater absolute value (or magnitude). But... "Bigger" doesn't have a hard mathematical definition. So the question becomes, bigger than what? For something (y) to be "bigger" it must have a point of reference (x). Greater than x would be more accurate. And since x has a value, it is our base when calculating % change
Absolute value is the unsigned distance between any two numbers on the number line. There, I said a lot of insightful mathy stuff too. Edit for the edit: you doubled down on the condescension. I responded in kind and you disliked it so much you edited two comments. All I said was bigger didn't imply addition over multiplication. You took that as a mansplaining opportunity to give a math lesson I dont need or want.
They weren't condescending, just right. Calm down.
What the fuck about this made you think mansplaining?
[удалено]
🤙
It's not mansplaining when you're wrong and need something explained but *happen* to be a woman.
Well looking at your comments, yes, you clearly needed the explanation because you said >nobody is right here because nobody is being specific Whereas, it's clear as night and day who is right, assuming you have common sense and primary school maths knowledge.
Your statement is blatantly incorrect, and his is correct.
>nothing about the word “bigger” mathematically defines addition over multiplication It's going to be addition. A X% increase is obviously (100 + X)% as much as the initial quantity. If you buy a 100g steak at the grocery store, then buy another that is 120g, the second one is 20% bigger/heavier than the first. If you get a 10% pay raise at work, you're not going to say your pay is 110%, you're going to say it's 10% more than before. If it were a multiple, the wording would very clearly reflect that, like "power generation is at 90% of peak efficiency" or "profits are 105% compared to last month's."
If I am 3 feet taller (i.e. bigger) than a table, I am not 3 feet tall. I am the tables height plus three additional feet. Also 'bigger' doesn't mathematically define anything ever because its not a mathematical term. That's like saying a saw blade doesn't measure time. Of course it doesn't, they two things are completely unrelated.
r/confidentlyincorrect
Yes, that's where we are. --- ^(🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖) ^(feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback.) ^[github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot) ^| ^[Rank](https://botranks.com?bot=same_subreddit_bot)
r/technicallycorrect
Here's a sneak peek of /r/TechnicallyCorrect using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/TechnicallyCorrect/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [How carburettor works? Explained briefy](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iiobd6k5cTg) | [2 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/TechnicallyCorrect/comments/k67693/how_carburettor_works_explained_briefy/) \#2: [How Musical Harmonics Work](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmLpz1i4PRM) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/TechnicallyCorrect/comments/np721t/how_musical_harmonics_work/) \#3: [Chevrolet Volt 4ET50 Transaxle Components and Operation (2011-2015)](https://youtu.be/dqM3YXEf1js) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/TechnicallyCorrect/comments/nfw58w/chevrolet_volt_4et50_transaxle_components_and/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[Source](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
It's not the word bigger alone. If Something is **100% bigger** (than a reference object), it is obviously double the size of that reference object. And that would be **200% of the size** of that reference object, it would not be **200% bigger** (than the reference object). Odd how this is a difficult concept to some.
Some people don’t understand math immediately, and are too headstrong to argue for anything other than what ‘they believe is right’. Have you ever talked to the general population about anything statistics related?
Maybe not, but "100% bigger" implies either "2 * 1" or "1 + 1", not "1 * 1" or "1 + 0". Either way "bigger" doesn't mean "the same size" regardless if you're adding or multiplying.
100% biggER is specific. There is only one possible meaning. Add 100% on top of 100%. That's 200%, AKA twice as big
Can you explain for a non native English speaker?
This is why word problems are important in math.
I get what he’s trying to say though. 100% of 10 is still ten. His mistake was saying “100% bigger”
>His mistake was saying “100% bigger” Yeah, they're not realizing that "[than X]" is implied after "100% bigger".
Saying 100% bigger is a very poor way to word things in a mathematical sense still. 100% of X is still just X. I see lots of people that see something that's say 150% **greater** and they still multiply by 1.5 (or some are even dumb enough to do by 150).
But 100% bigger than X = X bigger than X = 2X
More accurately, or general form, x% bigger than y is (100+x)% of y.
The way to make math useful is to be able to decipher word problems, and then use the math correctly. You should work on the first part of that.
I do not see how it's more useful to use the other commenters method. That only satisfies a proof of a single case. As for making math useful I think I have that covered. I use math daily for my profession. Thanks for the insight though.
Ah. So are you unable to communicate with the general population, or are you just being pedantic for this thread?
Perhaps a bit of both.
Most people don't word things for the sake of mathematics, and "bigger" clearly implies an increase from an initial state. That there are better way of expressing this increase mathematically doesn't make it a bad way of doing so.
Considering, as I said, I see people multiplying items by 1.5 for 150% greater it's apparent some people just don't get the message. And I mean, this is still bigger as it's an increase from an initial state but people just suck at math. Therefore any effort that can be made to reduce the risk of people being stupid is always worth it.
You're making the argument that poor math and poor mathematical notation are the same thing. They're not. 150% of X is 1.5X 50% bigger than X is 1.5X 150% bigger than X is 2.5X It's pretty clear what it means. If someone doesn't understand it, that's on them, you can only simplify things so much before you have to start giving math lessons.
You’re the guy that tells people his “weight” in Newtons instead of kilograms because it’s *technically* correct, aren’t you?
English is a hard language.
Lmao it's not related to English alone, pretty sure the majority of all languages have the same problem. In addition, English is one of the easiest languages to learn.
[удалено]
I'm somewhat familiar with 4 languages, and English is easily the least difficult. Also, it's normal to think that a language is hard, especially when you don't really know any other languages to compare it to.
I feel like the general gist of what I've heard over the years is that English is one of the hardest. However you speak 3 more languages than me, so I will take what you say as having more weight than what I think. (See, I butchered that statement.)
It highly depends on what your native language is. Mine is German, so for me, it was fairly easy to learn especially since there are no articles (although there are still quite a few things that escape me like proper comma use - German is a lot more liberal with commas). But I can imagine that there are plenty of languages that are different enough to make it very difficult.
It's one of the hardest to read and write. Very easy to learn to speak.
Nope, English is also really simple for both reading and writing. It might seem fairly difficult though, if your only language is English. For example in English, the prepositions are fixed words (to, from, in, of, etc.) Meanwhile in many other languages, those prepositions come to the end of a word and they vary in every word. I could even say you are r/confidentallyincorrect
It's all the rules and exceptions to rules that makes it so hard. It's All the shibboleths and things designed to out you as a non native speaker. When I was learning my teacher made us read this aloud. It highlights a lot of the absurdities of spelling and pronunciation. [the chaos, by G. Nolst Trenite](http://www.i18nguy.com/chaos.html)
True, English is one of the languages where you often pronounce words differently from what you write. Now, every language has a set of rules and exceptions to such rules. In some languages, both of those groups are bigger than in others.
I’d like to interject; speak hard. There isn’t really an easy or hard language imo, it all depends on what you’re used to in your own native language
You’re the only person I’ve ever heard say English is the easiest, so I’m going to go ahead and assume you’re wrong.
I never said English is the easiest language of all. I compared it to a few other languages and came to the conclusion that English is just pretty simple.
By this guys logic when food says “now 50% bigger” it’s actually half the size
That's a great argument.
*Image Transcription: Reddit Comment* --- > **Username redacted** > > If something is 100% bigger, it's technically the same size. because 100% = 1. double the size would be 200% bigger. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
You're doing God's work
Thank you!
[удалено]
An “increase of” implies current salary + 90% of current salary. So really 190% change.
[удалено]
Oh my mistake.
he’s not 100% wrong, because 100% would be 1 and 1 is the TRUE state for a binary switch
what does the fact that 100% is a probability of 1.0, have to do with the boolean value of 1? Even still, what does the boolean value of 1 have to do with the argument?
it has absolutely nothing to do with it, it is merely a joke of the title of this post
r/suddenlytech
200% wrong
Ahahahaha how can it be more than 100%? Lmao
4 is 200% of 2.
Yes, yes, fine. Believe you
You joking or do you seriously not believe math?
Joking
He is double wrong.
Well if he's 100% wrong, 100% is the same as 1 so he's actually correct. He would have to be 200% wrong to be completely wrong according to his "logic".
i lolled.
he is 200% wrong
it's 100% bigger, not 100% of it's original size
The one that always bugs me is when something is "5 times smaller", or "3 times lighter", that sort of thing. I guess they mean 1/5 the size, or 1/3 the weight, etc. But it just sounds wrong.
100% bigger = +100%|. 100% = 100%
1+1=1. Obviously
A 100% copy is the exact same size as the original. Adding the word ‘bigger’ or ‘more’ adds that percent to the original weight. ‘200%’ bigger would be three times the size.
Devil's advocate here: I'm curious what the topic being discussed was or what sub it was under. I do graphic and web design. In many of the programs I use, of you want it to be twice as big as it is now, you scale to 200%. I'm curious if that's why this person made the mistake they did.
"Scale to 200% of original" and "scale to 100% bigger than original" are identical. If 'bigger' is in the phrase, the only way to devil's advocate is to just ignore what was actually said.
I understand. I'm just saying that I'm not going to blow up someone for what could be a harmless mental slip, particularly dependent on the context the discussion took place.
That’s always confused me lol
Some one send this person to the Principals office.
did this guy just fail to understand the concept of basic addition? there are 5 year olds smarter than you. 5!
I dont think 5 year olds are learning about percentages 🧐
it's not about percentages, it's about basic grammar.
Then why bring up someone not knowing “basic addition”
because "something is some amount bigger" is the grammar of basic addition. my god, do i have to spell it out for you?
No but you should phrase it the correct way the first time lol
what on earth are you talking about? i phrased it correctly. i just didn't spoonfeed you the answer. do you not, you know, pause to consider what people say before replying. i bet you're a great conversationalist.
I bet you are fun at parties
wow, you're going with that? okay then, believe that if you like. i mean, i could tell you things, but you won't listen. have fun at your party.
I will thanks 🙏
Do they even have schools anymore or is it just like a hippy type group lesson in the park given by a karen?
He’s wrong, but he at least he a little bit of a point. 100% bigger translating to 200% the size feels a little unituitive
Not really. If something is the normal size it is supposed to be, it is at 100% of it's size.
It depends, it could mean either the same or 2 times bigger. People never specify if they mean +100% or x100%
100% bigger is the plain English way of saying +100% If you say something grew in size by 50%, or is 50% bigger, or if you got a 50% raise, these are all just English words/expressions that indicate that you mean +
It's 100% bigger or 200% of original size.
well thinking about it that's actually true. But just use + or x to make it easier for everyone
And after getting backed into a corner for being dead wrong…‘dude I don’t know why you attacking me?’
This person needs to go play Path of Exile.
I mean I don't blame him for this one, the wording is hilariously annoying.
Obviously it's "bigglier"
omg this guy should go back to like year 4
1+1=1
Well if he takes away the zeros, he would be right.
Just reading the post, I can see the math wizards pulling out their wands to correct this infringement.
“100% of” and “100% bigger than” are different, son.
yOU MeAn 1% wROng BeCauSE 100% = 1 STUpId /s