TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: WAS: Squashed egos Now: 400% Longer From:"Alan D. Miller" <"Alan D. Miller"@educate.com> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com Date:Fri, 8 Oct 1999 09:30:42 -0400
John Posada asked:
<<Is this correction and explaination accurate?
> > 4 months is 400% longer than 4 weeks...4 times
> > longer.
> Actually, John, 4 months is 300% longer than 4
> weeks, 3 times longer, or 4 times as long.
> Assuming 1 month equals 4 weeks:
> * One month is 0% longer than 4 weeks (1 time as
> * Two months is 100% longer than 4 weeks (2 times
> as long).
> * Three months is 200% longer than 4 weeks (3
> times as long).
> * Four months is 300% longer than 4 weeks (4 times
> as long).>>
You are correct, John. Here's why:
If you assume 1 month equals 4 weeks (it doesn't, it's actually 52/12 weeks or
4.333... weeks, but who's counting?), then 4 months equals 16 weeks. Writing
this as a percentage gives us 4 times x times 100% = 16; where x represents the
unknown ratio (percentage), and the 100% is there to convert from a decimal
fraction to percent. Solving for x, we find x = 16/(4 times 100%), or 400%.
The confusion comes with the term "longer than," which may have been an
ill-advised choice here. Your critic seems to have interpreted "longer than" to
mean the difference between 4 weeks and 4 months (16 weeks minus 4 weeks, or 12
weeks) is what the 400% referred to. If you use "as long as", the result is