Fivefold or sixfold?
Henk Rhebergen
(because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
annily
> When something increases from 100 to 600, does it increase sixfold or
> (because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
I think most people would call that a sixfold increase, but I wouldn't
use the "-fold" term anyway. I would say it increased by 500%.
--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.
Mark Brader
> > When something increases from 100 to 600, does it increase sixfold or
> > (because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
"Annily":
> I think most people would call that a sixfold increase
Agreed.
> but I wouldn't use the "-fold" term anyway. I would say it increased
> by 500%.
And I'd probably say it increased "by a factor of 6". Unfortunately,
not many people prefer this.
--
Mark Brader "Men are animals."
Toronto "What are women? Plants, birds, fish?"
m...@vex.net -- Spider Robinson, "Night of Power"
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
>Henk Rhebergen:
>> > When something increases from 100 to 600, does it increase sixfold or
>> > (because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
>
>"Annily":
>> I think most people would call that a sixfold increase
>
>Agreed.
>
>> but I wouldn't use the "-fold" term anyway. I would say it increased
>> by 500%.
>
>And I'd probably say it increased "by a factor of 6". Unfortunately,
>not many people prefer this.
And some would find that ambiguous. They might interpret "increased by a
factor of 6" to mean that the increase, the additional amount, is 6
times the size of the original so that the new size is the original
times 7.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Mark Brader
>> And I'd probably say it increased "by a factor of 6". Unfortunately,
>> not many people prefer this.
Peter Duncanson:
> And some would find that ambiguous.
And they would be wrong. You can't win, can you?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, m...@vex.net
#define MSB(type) (~(((unsigned type)-1)>>1))
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
>Mark Brader:
>>> And I'd probably say it increased "by a factor of 6". Unfortunately,
>>> not many people prefer this.
>
>Peter Duncanson:
>> And some would find that ambiguous.
>
>And they would be wrong. You can't win, can you?
No.
Ian Jackson
Duncanson (BrE)" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> writes
>On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:23:21 -0600, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
>
>>Mark Brader:
>>>> And I'd probably say it increased "by a factor of 6". Unfortunately,
>>>> not many people prefer this.
>>
>>Peter Duncanson:
>>> And some would find that ambiguous.
>>
>>And they would be wrong. You can't win, can you?
>
>No.
>
--
Ian
annily
OED agrees with this too. It's more about the final result than the
increase.
Robert Bannister
> On 2011-02-21 20:38, Henk Rhebergen wrote:
>> When something increases from 100 to 600, does it increase sixfold or
>> (because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
>
> I think most people would call that a sixfold increase, but I wouldn't
> use the "-fold" term anyway. I would say it increased by 500%.
>
While I understand your logic, what would you understand by "it
increased by 100%"?
--
Rob Bannister
annily
That it doubled. What else could it mean?
Peter Moylan
> On 2011-02-22 11:18, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 21/02/11 7:03 PM, annily wrote:
>>> On 2011-02-21 20:38, Henk Rhebergen wrote:
>>>> When something increases from 100 to 600, does it increase sixfold or
>>>> (because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
>>>
>>> I think most people would call that a sixfold increase, but I wouldn't
>>> use the "-fold" term anyway. I would say it increased by 500%.
>>>
>>
>> While I understand your logic, what would you understand by "it
>> increased by 100%"?
>
> That it doubled. What else could it mean?
>
multiplicative change and an additive change. "Increased sixfold" is a
multiplicative change. "Increased by 500%" is an additive change. (So
they both mean the same thing, because 1+5=6.)
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Robert Bannister
> On 2011-02-22 11:18, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 21/02/11 7:03 PM, annily wrote:
>>> On 2011-02-21 20:38, Henk Rhebergen wrote:
>>>> When something increases from 100 to 600, does it increase sixfold or
>>>> (because the increase is 500 = 5 x 100) fivefold?
>>>
>>> I think most people would call that a sixfold increase, but I wouldn't
>>> use the "-fold" term anyway. I would say it increased by 500%.
>>>
>>
>> While I understand your logic, what would you understand by "it
>> increased by 100%"?
>>
>
> That it doubled. What else could it mean?
>
So, 200 = 100 x 2 is 100%. therefore 600 = 100 x 6 and must be 600% and
not 500%. That is what I was getting at.
--
Rob Bannister
annily
Yes, but we were talking about the increase, not the final result.
An increase from 100 to 200 is an increase of 100, which is 100% of the
original. An increase from 100 to 600 is an increase of 500, which is
500% of the original amount.
Snidely
x1 = 2 * x0; x1 = 200 % of x0; x1 = x0 + delta-x where delta-x = 100%
of x0.
Simple, if you don't have to make a word problem of it. ;-)
/dps
Robert Bannister
It is as Peter Moylan said, the difference between multiplication and
addition:
100 x 2 = 200; 100 x 6 = 600
100 + 2 = 200; 100 + 500 = 600.
so the problem lies in the English "an increase of". I can understand
why so many school kids hate percentages.
--
Rob Bannister
annily
Well, 100 + 100 = 200 anyway :)
> 100 + 500 = 600.
>
> so the problem lies in the English "an increase of". I can understand
> why so many school kids hate percentages.
>
And many media reporters get it wrong too (at least in Australia).
Robert Bannister
I could always do algebra, but had problems with arithmetic when actual
numbers were used.
>
>> 100 + 500 = 600.
>>
>> so the problem lies in the English "an increase of". I can understand
>> why so many school kids hate percentages.
>>
>
> And many media reporters get it wrong too (at least in Australia).
>
Are they getting it wrong? I seem to remember my maths teacher in about
2nd year of high school telling us how percentages could be used to fool
people. It is the English language that is ambiguous, and a wonderful
thing it is too for politicians, business people and journalists.
--
Rob Bannister
annily
Sure, percentages really need to qualified by "of what", but this is the
only thing that may be ambiguous in this example.
In this case, I don't think "an increase of x%" or "increased by x%" is
ambiguous, since the only things it could be a percentage of are the
original or final values.
That English usage can only be talking about the change in the value,
not the final value, unless you understand something different from what
I do by the word "increase". Thus the increase would either be 500% or
about 83% (500/600), but not 600%.
If they said "increased to x%" that would be different, as that would be
talking about the final value, not the increase.