What's new

decades of covid

You are looking at it in two different ways at the same time. Saying the figure has increased by 30% of what it was originally is true, but in relation to the ratio that the figure was presented , it isn't increasing by the same proportion.

10 to 13 per 1000 may be an increase of 30% based on the 10 but that is assuming you use the 10 as the figure. If the 10 is in proportion to 1000 then it's not increasing by 30 percent.

It's two different sums you are using at the same time which don't match up , if that makes sense?

If you break it down to 100 for a basic percentage.

1 % increases to 1.3% of the overall ratio. For it to increase by 30% it would go up by 30, or in the 1000 sense, 300.

The 10 is only relative to the 1000. As it means literally 10 per 1000 , so 1% of the figure. To call it a 30% increase its ignoring the base figure that the proportion is determined on.

Or in simpler terms , 10 of what? You have to have a 10 of something to determine a ratio. So you can only increase by the of number to have an accurate increase.

Otherwise 10 increasing to 13 is only increasing by 30% if the total number is 20, rather than a thousand.



In the instance we are discussing it's not changing. Whether it's 10 or 100 per 1000 the last number doesn't change. Otherwise the ratio does not change at all, as previously said.

imagine your friend had 100 giant bananas. if you had one giant banana, and he gave you 3/10ths, or 0.3 giant bananas, your wealth in giant bananas will have increased by 30%.

now imagine your friend has 1000 giant bananas, and you only have 1/10th, or 0.1 giant bananas. your friend gives you 0.03 giant bananas. despite you now only having 0.13 giant bananas, your share of giant bananas has still increased by 30%.

you can replace giant bananas with anything else and this still works the same.

:)

For the benefit of the English members, are you two talking in Scottish ? :18:
 
One of my favourite TV programmes is DIY Le Donnie... avec le subtitles...
 
Sorry dude, I give up. Gonna leave this one to @zouzounaki :18:

But I can assure you that 1.3 is a 30% increase on 1. :)

But it's not a 30% increase of 10 out of a 1000, or 1 out of 100.

It's an increase of only the 1 , removing what the 1 is out of to determine what the 1 stands for.

imagine your friend had 100 giant bananas. if you had one giant banana, and he gave you 3/10ths, or 0.3 giant bananas, your wealth in giant bananas will have increased by 30%.

now imagine your friend has 1000 giant bananas, and you only have 1/10th, or 0.1 giant bananas. your friend gives you 0.03 giant bananas. despite you now only having 0.13 giant bananas, your share of giant bananas has still increased by 30%.

you can replace giant bananas with anything else and this still works the same.

:)

Your numbers are wrong again!

1/10th of 1000 is 100 , or 10%.

0.1 giant banana out of 1000 would be 1 giant banana in that ratio which is another number again!

Basically you have to increase the 1 in proportion of the 1000 to have it make sense in a ratio perspective. It you just increase the 1 then you aren't increasing the ratio itself, which is what the 10/1000 is, a ratio.

In percentage terms , 10-13 out of 1000 is 1 % turning into 1.3%. It's increased by .3% not 30% in the ratio of the out of 1000 part.

It has to be out of something , that's the part I'm trying to explain. Just because you increase the bottom number, it's in accordance with the top number, in this case the 1000 doesn't increase.

So to turn it back to the real life example and not bananas.

Mortality in that age group has only increased by .3% because 13 out of 1000 is only 1.3%. to increase it by 30% you lower the out of number which means the ratio isn't the same or you increase it by 290.

Your explanation is terrible, why can't you post a link... or summats? :)

13 minus 10 = 3
3 divided by original total, say 1000, is 0.3% increase.
3 divided by original total, say 20, is 15% increase.

Yes you are increasing the number out of the context of what the number is. It's out of 1000, so that remains out of 1000.

100 vape pens and you have 1 and someone gives you a third of another vape pen. You haven't gained 30% more vape pens , you have only gained a third of one.

It's literally on the percentage. 10 out of 1000 is 1%. So 13 out of 1000 is 1.3% of the total. For every 1000 people with covid , 1.3% die.

By saying it's a 30% increase of what it was , yes that is true but in terms of the X out of 1000, it doesn't increase by the same amount.

They are two different figures which I think is being confused here. The X out of 1000 doesn't change no matter what number it is. It's still out of 1000 for it to be a valid proportional ratio.
 
By the end of this thread the number will be 14 and we'll all have to redo our calculations.
 
Your numbers are wrong again!

1/10th of 1000 is 100 , or 10%.

0.1 giant banana out of 1000 would be 1 giant banana in that ratio which is another number again!

Basically you have to increase the 1 in proportion of the 1000 to have it make sense in a ratio perspective. It you just increase the 1 then you aren't increasing the ratio itself, which is what the 10/1000 is, a ratio.

In percentage terms , 10-13 out of 1000 is 1 % turning into 1.3%. It's increased by .3% not 30% in the ratio of the out of 1000 part.

It has to be out of something , that's the part I'm trying to explain. Just because you increase the bottom number, it's in accordance with the top number, in this case the 1000 doesn't increase.

So to turn it back to the real life example and not bananas.

Mortality in that age group has only increased by .3% because 13 out of 1000 is only 1.3%. to increase it by 30% you lower the out of number which means the ratio isn't the same or you increase it by 290.

it’s obvious you just don’t understand this, so i’m going to stop trying to explain.
 
But it's not a 30% increase of 10 out of a 1000, or 1 out of 100.

It's an increase of only the 1 , removing what the 1 is out of to determine what the 1 stands for.



Your numbers are wrong again!

1/10th of 1000 is 100 , or 10%.

0.1 giant banana out of 1000 would be 1 giant banana in that ratio which is another number again!

Basically you have to increase the 1 in proportion of the 1000 to have it make sense in a ratio perspective. It you just increase the 1 then you aren't increasing the ratio itself, which is what the 10/1000 is, a ratio.

In percentage terms , 10-13 out of 1000 is 1 % turning into 1.3%. It's increased by .3% not 30% in the ratio of the out of 1000 part.

It has to be out of something , that's the part I'm trying to explain. Just because you increase the bottom number, it's in accordance with the top number, in this case the 1000 doesn't increase.

So to turn it back to the real life example and not bananas.

Mortality in that age group has only increased by .3% because 13 out of 1000 is only 1.3%. to increase it by 30% you lower the out of number which means the ratio isn't the same or you increase it by 290.



Yes you are increasing the number out of the context of what the number is. It's out of 1000, so that remains out of 1000.

100 vape pens and you have 1 and someone gives you a third of another vape pen. You haven't gained 30% more vape pens , you have only gained a third of one.

It's literally on the percentage. 10 out of 1000 is 1%. So 13 out of 1000 is 1.3% of the total. For every 1000 people with covid , 1.3% die.

By saying it's a 30% increase of what it was , yes that is true but in terms of the X out of 1000, it doesn't increase by the same amount.

They are two different figures which I think is being confused here. The X out of 1000 doesn't change no matter what number it is. It's still out of 1000 for it to be a valid proportional ratio.

it’s obvious you just don’t understand this, so i’m going to stop trying to explain.

I think they have moved onto Swahili now. :18:
 
It's been explained and he understands. He's just trolling now, me thinks.
 
Naaa it’s

upload_2021-1-23_19-4-8.gif
 
To be fair there is a real easy explanation for this and it’s nothing to do with maths

If the figures was wrong or even remotely off due to the calculation the media would be all over this like a bad suit

you would have headlines like this

“Boris can’t add up”

“My 5 year old daughter can work this out”

“Unborn baby in Tracy Berkshire’s womb adds up better than the PM”

“U.K. maths problem worst in the world”

so the calculations were correct move along now....,,
 
Back
Top Bottom