Sjmarf to memes@lemmy.world • 1 year agoMafssh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square58fedilinkarrow-up11.21Karrow-down113
arrow-up11.2Karrow-down1imageMafssh.itjust.worksSjmarf to memes@lemmy.world • 1 year agomessage-square58fedilink
minus-square@wischi@programming.devlinkfedilink18•1 year agoOriginal post is not linearly interpolating but exponentially.
minus-square@Localhorst86@feddit.delinkfedilink28•edit-21 year agothis comic uses a log scale (I extrapolate this from the only two data points given).
minus-square@NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilink4•1 year ago(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.
minus-squarethreelonmusketeerslinkfedilinkEnglish3•1 year agoIf that were the case, the y-axis label would be log(NUMBER OF HUSBANDS), no?
minus-squareoce 🐆linkfedilink5•1 year agoIt’s a choice, it’s not mandatory to use a log on your y axis when you plot a log.
Extrapolating!
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.
Nice. Haven’t thought about that 🤣
New data point in 3…2…