0
Janewantslearn Posted 11 years ago
Grammar
Please help me understand this sentence.
Hi Guys, could you give me some help on understanding this sentence?
Because of the salt runoff from the land and the sea-floor's own production of salt, the saline levels of the oceans should increase by about 10 percent every 240 million years—or, over the last 3.5 billion years, by about* 2000 percent*.
If my standing is right, then the *2000%* seems impossible. Do you guys also feel this number is a little bit strange? Or just me.
Thanks a lot!
Because of the salt runoff from the land and the sea-floor's own production of salt, the saline levels of the oceans should increase by about 10 percent every 240 million years—or, over the last 3.5 billion years, by about* 2000 percent*.
If my standing is right, then the *2000%* seems impossible. Do you guys also feel this number is a little bit strange? Or just me.
Thanks a lot!
Top answer
I can't see how that number is arrived at. There is the question of whether 10% means always 10% of the original amount, or whether there is supposed to be compounding (exponential growth). ).
- I can't see how that number is arrived at.
- There is the question of whether 10% means always 10% of the original amount, or whether there is supposed to be compounding (exponential growth).
- ).
- In any case, whichever method is assumed, I don't get anything like 2000%.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
I can't see how that number is arrived at. There is the question of whether 10% means always 10% of the original amount, or whether there is supposed to be compounding (exponential growth). To me, the wording implies the latter, but physically this doesn't seem very plausible (why should greater existing salinity mean that more new salt is dissolved?). In any case, whichever method is assum
00
If my understanding is right, then the *2000%* seems impossible.
I agree. It is not only mathematically fallacious, it is scientifically fallacious.
http://apps.usd.edu/esci/creation/age/content/failed_scientific_clocks/ocean_salinity.html
I agree. It is not only mathematically fallacious, it is scientifically fallacious.
http://apps.usd.edu/esci/creation/age/content/failed_scientific_clocks/ocean_salinity.html
00
Hi GPY, thank you for supporting me. I agree the wording implies exponential growth, but physically the mount of added salt should be fixed if the salt only "runoff from the land and the sea-floor", then I think the 10% means linear growth. Then it would be about 150% instead of 2000%.
I really think people should write more carefully when they are writing a book. I try to figure out where the
I really think people should write more carefully when they are writing a book. I try to figure out where the
00
Hi AlpheccaStars,
Thank you for confirming my understanding! the number of 2000% seems so strange! I really don't know how they get it!
But the quotation I cited is not the whole paragraph, the author continues as "But obviously that has not happened, and in fact there appear never to have been any great variations in salinity in all that time."
Thank you so much and have a g
Thank you for confirming my understanding! the number of 2000% seems so strange! I really don't know how they get it!
But the quotation I cited is not the whole paragraph, the author continues as "But obviously that has not happened, and in fact there appear never to have been any great variations in salinity in all that time."
Thank you so much and have a g
0
Related Questions