Ah - but...
... I'm also a humanities tart. You can't expect scientific rigour from me.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Mon 16 Mar 2009, 13:59,
Reply)
He should multiply along 3 axes as opposed to 2
if he's going up in volume.
Ok, so we can't expect scientific rigour, how about basic maths? ;)
edit: hang on, I bet they're using the american billion as opposed to our good old British billion...
(
DrPrunesquallor is determined to post more as of, Mon 16 Mar 2009, 14:04,
Reply)
Yup - that's my point.
He seems to have 10x10 stacks; he should have 10x10x10 to get from one million to a billion (assuming that 1 billion is a thousand million).
EDIT - I mean the other way around. What he calls a hundred mill should be 10x10; he's given it as 10x10x10.
Yup. I'm thick.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Mon 16 Mar 2009, 14:06,
Reply)
the top layer isn't 10 times bigger both ways
It's an illusion. As are most 100 million dollar amounts it turns out :)
(
Professor Fnord Regius Professor of B3ta Chronology, Mon 16 Mar 2009, 14:10,
Reply)
Based on his image of 'a packet'
The pallet is only 7 packets wide (assuming one wrap per packet). How this affects everything else, I'm not sure, but I don't see how he can have a tidy cube of 10000 packets if it's 7 packets across the bottom...
(
TheAlmightyBeev, Mon 16 Mar 2009, 14:48,
Reply)