|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Okay, so 'indirect' means anything but direct. If the opposite of 'inverse proportion' is 'direct proportion', then that would make 'indirect proportion' and 'inverse proportion' the same thing, no?
No, indirect is not the opposite of direct.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
No, indirect is not the opposite of direct.
'Indirect', according to you, is 'anything but direct'. An inverse proportion is 'anything but direct', given the definition of an inverse proportion. Therefore, 'inverse proportion' and 'indirect proportion' are the same thing.
This is quite possibly the studiest argument I have ever participated in.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,978
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,978 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by Davo:
Okay, so 'indirect' means anything but direct. If the opposite of 'inverse proportion' is 'direct proportion', then that would make 'indirect proportion' and 'inverse proportion' the same thing, no?
No, indirect is not the opposite of direct.
I think you guys could have used this picture a while back. Here I was thinking there was some new commentary on her blog! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by Davo:
'Inversely' is the more traditional term, but 'indirectly' started being used because it is the opposite of 'directly', so it was easier to understand the concepts. Again, just because it wasn't used in high school math doesn't mean it's inappropriate.
indirect : anything other than direct. I took the indirect route to work today.
inverse : opposite
Sorry, but you brought up intellect.
Okay, so 'indirect' means anything but direct. If the opposite of 'inverse proportion' is 'direct proportion', then that would make 'indirect proportion' and 'inverse proportion' the same thing, no? I didn't think I'd have to spell it out for you like this, but I guess you forced me to.
Of course that doesn't make "indirect" and "inverse" the same thing.
It makes them possibly the same thing, as indirect is not always necessarily inverse. So "indirectly proportionate" is not necessarily the same thing as "inversely proportionate" although it can be.
I know you know your fair share of statistics Davo, as do I, and I've got to say that I've never heard the term "Indirectly Proportionate" ever used. And, if I did see it, I would simply assume it meant "not directly proportionate", which does not mean "inversely proportionate", and if they meant inverse, they would have used it.
It's like the common SAT questions -- "If all 'B's are opposite from 'A's, and some 'C's are 'B's, are all 'C's opposite from 'A's.'?
Granted, I do see where you are coming from. In statistics you do not speak in the certainties that "inversely proportionate" would entail. To disprove a hypothesis involving directly proportionate, I do suppose that saying "indirectly proportionate" would be the more correct method. That's not to say that I can recall ever having read it myself (nor does Google find many references to it being used), nor would I use such a term in common conversation simply because it is (purposefully) vague as to your true intention, if you truly do mean inversely.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by Davo:
An inverse proportion is 'anything but direct'
How did you get this mixed up? I'm not going to explain it again.
Originally posted by Davo:
Therefore, 'inverse proportion' and 'indirect proportion' are the same thing.
Someone else please explain this to Davo. I'm worn out and have work to do.
Originally posted by Davo:
This is quite possibly the studiest argument I have ever participated in.
If you could admit you are wrong and you didn't question someones intellect then it wouldn't have happened.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by sigma:
It makes them possibly the same thing, as indirect is not always necessarily inverse. So "indirectly proportionate" is not necessarily the same thing as "inversely proportionate" although it can be.
Certainly it's not absolute, but for the purposes of my argument, it was. The only absolute in dealing with proportions is that the only one that is neither is 0.
Of course, for presentations, articles, and papers, we used 'inversely', but for common conversation I find it's easier and more understood to use 'indirectly', 'directly'.
EDIT: Check that, we spoke in terms of correlation, not proportion.
Last edited by Davo; 03/31/05 10:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
If you could admit you are wrong and you didn't question someones intellect then it wouldn't have happened.
I have a personal rule that if I repeat myself more than twice then I can't admit I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Of course, for presentations, articles, and papers, we used 'inversely', but for common conversation I find it's easier and more understood to use 'indirectly', 'directly'.
Originally posted by sigma:
I've never heard the term "Indirectly Proportionate" ever used. And, if I did see it, I would simply assume it meant "not directly proportionate", which does not mean "inversely proportionate", and if they meant inverse, they would have used it.
Thanks Sigma. Davo must have ignored this part of your post.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 219
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 219 |
News Flash!!!! This isn't just your world.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 219
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 219 |
|
|
|
|
|
