My Decimal Challenge

[Kylie]

Move the Decimal Point to Change a Number’s Value - dummies

So then you would understand that moving the decimal point will change a number's value by an order of magnitude.

Since there is far less than an order of magnitude difference between 9 and 13.8, it would seem that it is obvious the decimal place would not need to move.

So I have to wonder why you asked.

 

[Kylie]

1.0
10.0
100.0
1000.0
10,000.0

Oh, look. The decimal point is moving!

1.0
10.0
100.0
1000.0
10,000.0

No it isn't!​

 

[AV1611VET]

This thread is making my brain hurt. What, exactly, have we learned here today?

That scientists move the decimal arbitrarily to make their theories fit.

 

[lesliedellow]

That scientists move the decimal arbitrarily to make their theories fit.

You didn't do too well with maths at school, did you?

 

[Kylie]

That scientists move the decimal arbitrarily to make their theories fit.

Ah, so when you said you understood how decimals worked back in post 14, you were not telling the truth?

 

[Obliquinaut]

That scientists move the decimal arbitrarily to make their theories fit.

Ummm, you do know that isn't right, correct? I mean, have you ever had to sit through lectures in intro science classes on significant figures?

I can't begin to figure out what your point is in this thread but clearly you got something very, very wrong.

If you don't understand science, you can always learn it. But making accusations that are factually incorrect is not going to impress anyone. Especially those who do that sort of thing for a living.

How 'bout we revisit Luke 6:31 again, shall we?

Let us say, ummmm, that people who work with radio communications consistently lie about things. It is a fault of theirs. Perhaps they want to do right but are simply prone to lying all the time. If only they'd use their skills for good. We know they can do good things, but the lying that so many of them do is just hard to take.

How are we doing now?

 

[MrSpikey]

Now that I think about it, the decimal point never moves. Its always stuck between the ones position and the tenths position

The decimal is ALWAYS to the right of the ones column.

Both the above are true, but also ignore that the decimal point can move.

Standard form, for example, would write 120 000 000 as 1.2x10^8. The decimal point is still in the middle of the 1s and 1/10s, but the multiplier makes it a different number. Expressing it in standard form has artificially moved the decimal point to adhere to a standard.

That said, I'm sure few will be surprised if I say AV1611Vet's OP is a load of rubbish.

 

[jacks]

I voted "Yes", but then I've never believed in math. BTW is it just a coincidence that some people think the universe is 13.8 billion years old? (Give or take a few decimals...)

 

[Kylie]

I voted "Yes", but then I've never believed in math. BTW is it just a coincidence that some people think the universe is 13.8 billion years old? (Give or take a few decimals...)

You don't believe in the basis by which the computer you are currently using operates?

How does it work then, if it isn't mathematical?

 

[AV1611VET]

I can't begin to figure out what your point is in this thread ...

It's a rant against deep time.

The Bible only allows for 6020 years of history, but science has to move the decimal point seven decimal places to the right to account for Beelzebang (Big Bang).

 

[AirPo]

1.0
10.0
100.0
1000.0
10,000.0

Oh, look. The decimal point is moving!

Oh look, someone is wrong again.

 

[AirPo]

It's a rant against deep time.

The Bible only allows for 6020 years of history, but science has to move the decimal point seven decimal places to the right to account for Beelzebang (Big Bang).

The rant part is correct, but the Bible part is not.

 

[Obliquinaut]

It's a rant against deep time.

The Bible only allows for 6020 years of history, but science has to move the decimal point seven decimal places to the right to account for Beelzebang (Big Bang).

Ahh, I see the issue. You see, science didn't just "move the decimal point". The DATA showed a value >6020 years.

Besides I thought you were all about deep time being real, just "embedded" by God.

 

[Jimmy D]

It's a rant against deep time.

The Bible only allows for 6020 years of history, but science has to move the decimal point seven decimal places to the right to account for Beelzebang (Big Bang).

Where do you get 6020 years from?

 

[lesliedellow]

Where do you get 6020 years from?

According to Bishop Ussher, the Earth will have celebrated its 6020th birthday on 5 February this year.

Did you wish it happy birthday?

 

[Jimmy D]

According to Bishop Ussher, the Earth will have celebrated its 6020th birthday on 5 February this year.

Did you wish it happy birthday?

I was under the impression that the genealogies weren't that precise and not all calculations agreed with Ussher's.

 

[lesliedellow]

I was under the impression that the genealogies weren't that precise and not all calculations agreed with Ussher's.

I don't know. It is not a calculation I have tried myself.

 

[AV1611VET]

Besides I thought you were all about deep time being real,

Absolutely not.

... just "embedded" by God.

Age was embedded ... not time.

Defined as: maturity without history.

 

[AV1611VET]

I was under the impression that the genealogies weren't that precise and not all calculations agreed with Ussher's.

It doesn't matter though, does it?

It's only a matter of degrees.

Or are you saying there are gaps in the genealogies from Adam to Jesus that amount to 13,700,000,000 years?

 

[Obliquinaut]

Absolutely not.

Age was embedded ... not time.

Defined as: maturity without history.

Wow. Here I thought you had a nearly fool-proof (ie unfalsifiable) claim. That God indeed miraculously embedded age within the rocks such that the rocks would literally be 4.5billion years old. But that God did so 6000 or so years ago.

That would mean that the scientists could not find the age to be anything but 4.5 billion years old because the rocks would literally be 4.5 billion years old.

Hence it would be incorrect to say the scientists erroneously "moved the decimal place".

Now your position doesn't even make sense! I'm sad to see it go this way. Previously it was impossible to argue against it because it was unfalsifiable (hence unscientific)...but at least it was impossible to debate the point since it allowed science to be technically correct and Biblical Literalism also be technically correct.

Now you've turned it into a mish-mash of poor logic and confusion.

Sad day indeed.