![]() |
![]() |
#1 | |
Nov 2004
22·33·5 Posts |
![]()
Just a note about an interesting article in the May 30 issue of the journal Science. Below is the layman's abstract from "This Week in Science"; can't link to the actual article because it requires a subscription.
Quote:
Norm |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
170148 Posts |
![]()
Negatives on my left, positives on my right.
When I'm thinking about a relatively short interval, it's linear, but when I'm "pulling back" for a broader view, higher-magnitude numbers slide in from right and left as the scale adjusts logarithmically. Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2008-06-25 at 03:23 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England
647410 Posts |
![]()
To take a photo of the entire (straight) number line
I would use a fish-eye lens. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
81D16 Posts |
![]()
For numbers <100 I usually visualize them like this:
20 21 22 23 23 ... 19 18 17 16 .... 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 ... Maybe I saw a chart up to 20 when I was small, then another when I was older and combined the two? 5 is linked to 25 by a blurred diagonal line, 6 is linked to 36 etc. Years A.D. look like this: 1900 1901 1902 1903 ... 2000 1800 1700 ... i.e. Before 1900 is much more compressed. There is a wall just after 2000 and the numbers then spread out above and below the number line. Any recommended medication? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Jun 2005
1011101012 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Nov 2003
22×5×373 Posts |
![]() Quote:
100 is 10 times bigger than 10, but as written, is only 1 additional character. People wind up ordering numbers not by magnitude, but lexicographically. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Bamboozled!
"๐บ๐๐ท๐ท๐ญ"
May 2003
Down not across
24×7×101 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Nov 2003
164448 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Bamboozled!
"๐บ๐๐ท๐ท๐ญ"
May 2003
Down not across
101100001100002 Posts |
![]() Quote:
However, they've probably heard words of about the same length being used to describe quantities at least 10 times bigger: hundred, thousand, million, etc.; so that may be related. Paul |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Oct 2007
Manchester, UK
2×5×137 Posts |
![]()
I don't visualise a number line at all, why would I need to?
I don't visualise the alphabet in a line when I'm writing either. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Sep 2005
Detroit, MI
108 Posts |
![]()
My guess would be that it has something to do with our inate abilities of scale/distance. For instance, back in our hunter/gather days, if you were hunting an animal for example, knowing the animal was 10 or 11 feet away wouldn't really make a difference, but if it was 1 ft or 10 ft then it would make a huge difference, same as between 10 and 100. Not that our brains knowthe numbers naturally, but our minds do know relative distances.
This is all a guess. I tried it on my 5 year old and he placed the 10 in the center of the line, just like the article said. Matt |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Windows command line | mu5tan6 | Software | 14 | 2015-03-20 17:21 |
The night was humid. (add a line or two) | only_human | Lounge | 5 | 2014-08-16 15:46 |
command line switch for the number of workers to start | roemer2201 | Software | 6 | 2012-02-16 07:47 |
Prime95 OS X illegal line in INI | kdawg | Information & Answers | 1 | 2010-07-17 13:50 |
E=6 in P-1 result line | S485122 | Software | 4 | 2007-01-28 04:02 |