logarithmic

The scale of the metaphor is logarithmic but so is the pace of the growth of our collective intelligence.

Yes, the analogy is bad because the richter scale is logarithmic, but the principle it illustrates is still perfectly valid and applicable to the discussion at hand.

The idea here is to get a smooth logarithmic division of each order of magnitude (power of 10).

A logarithmic graph scales by gain/loss per dollar, which is often more illuminating than the gain/loss per share.

Points tickets are logarithmic, if economy is 1X, business is usually 1.5-6X and first is usually 2X.

The Potato Paradox seems to build on a misleading set-up and peoples disability to picture logarithmic scales.

Therefore the Sun from Pluto is about half way between the Moon and Sun on earth (on a logarithmic scale).

I've wondered if part of the problem is that pH is logarithmic, so a drop of, say, 0.2 pH doesn't seem like that big of a deal.

Bernoulli argued that the paradox could be resolved if decision-makers displayed risk aversion and argued for a logarithmic cardinal utility function.

I'm also not convinced the logarithmic scaling for the coding is the best approach; it may be but I'd have to see it with a better color scheme.

The logarithmic graph makes it clear all percentiles grow at exactly the same rate.

A logarithmic graph looks more or less the same as the normal graph.

Since we call cases where something that looks polynomial on the surface but actually performs in NP "pseudo-polynomial," does it makes sense to call the cases where something more or less takes constant time "pseudo-logarithmic?"

> No, as the article notes, the measurement of magnitude (in > the Richter scale) is proportional to the base-32 logarithm > of energy released (its defined as proportional the base-10 > logarithm of seismic wave amplitude.) Yes, "magnitude" here is a logarithmic rather than linear measure of energy, but the critique is wrong (or underhanded) to suggest that Taleb doesn't realize this.

What is interesting about it to me is that the "true computational nature of reality" must be such that sufficient computation is available for you to run the _validation_ of your solution in logarithmic time an exponential number of times ("in parallel"), because otherwise you could not find yourself _at all_ in a universe where you knew you had found the correct computation.