I’m confused. Does everyone have to be good at math? Have you considered that some have gone years without having to use math because their daily life doesn’t call for it? Or that some people are simply not mathematically inclined? How sad that you feel the need to criticize others’ mathematical ability to make you feel better about yourself.
I don’t thing @eternalmetal was specifically talking about the forum, but about society in general. Math is something that is very important to how society works, but a lot of people who don’t use math in their daily lives only know up to middle school math. That’s not good. Practicing math helps with problem solving skills, logic skills, and is very useful if you ever decide to change your profession.
What’s more is that people who are bad at math talk about how math is pointless, which is just not true, it’s use in many professions has brought us everything that modern society provides. It’s the most fundamental and most useful science and deserves to be treated as such.
I mean you just gotta understand that it means different things in different contexts. The idea of “size” can refer to any one of length, height, width, volume, mass, area, perimeter, diameter, etc etc. I’m not aware of anyone that looks at the volume of yo-yos, so it seems silly to latch onto that here.
Also, the 66% edge beyond with gold-plated brass rings is 98% of the weight of the original Edge Beyond. But you wouldn’t call it almost the same size.
Yoyo manufacturers should list the volume of the cup so that people can use it to measure out stuff while cooking.
What does that even mean lol they are “just numbers”?
All numbers are just numbers…
Size refers to the object as a whole, not to any specific dimension. Also they were not talking about weight in this case.
Sure math is important; I’m not trying to undermine its importance in any way. Other subjects like history and english also serve important roles, but I don’t think it’s ever okay to criticize people for their lack of knowledge in any area. It shouldn’t be any individual’s place to determine how much of any given subject one should know. Creating some arbitrarily high boundary only to have others fall short is a great example of elitism or othering, which are destructive tactics rather than constructive. I don’t think it’s ever okay to say or do things that serve no purpose other than to divide a community, and that was the point I was trying to make.
I agree it’s not okay to criticize the inability of an individual or small group of individuals, that certainly is elitist. But I also think it’s absolutely necessary to criticize society’s general stance on math.
Ok dude, sorry, but now you are making me feel bad because I know basic math.
If you want make an object that is 66% of the size of the original object what you do is multiply the volume by .66 then find cube root.
For the sake of this example let’s use 55 in diameter by 55 in width.
So 55 x 55 x 55 =166,375
So we want 66% of that total volume.
166,375 x.66 = 109,808
That is the desired volume we want, now we cube it.
The cube root of is 109,808 is 47.9
So that would be the measurements for the 66% object:
47.9 x 47.9 x 47.9
Curious… did anyone posting in this thread really not understand what they meant when they named the line of yoyos 66%? I know I understood it. As long as the point gets across does it really matter how it’s worded?
It was just bothering me, so I posted it…
Because this is America, damnit.
So proud to be part of a community that has people as intelligent as the likes of you guys. Brilliant discussion.
What they did is they literally just multiplied every dimension by 0.66 and tried to desing a functional, well playing yoyo as close to those dimensions as possible.
Width: 47.00 mm
Edge Beyond multiplied by 0.66:
Dia: 53.40 x 0.66 = 35.24 mm
Wi: 47.00 x 0.66 = 31.02 mm
66Percent Edge Beyond:
Dia: 37.03 mm
Wi: 32.02 mm
So as you can see the specs are not dead on precise, but i bet that has to do more with design and manufacturing limitations than they being careless about how precise they wanted to be.
So the question left is what are we discussing here? Are we discussing the validity of the 66Percent statement in their brand compared to numbers? Or are we discussing how they should or should not have utilized the term if they were going to let the execution of the yoyos to be not as precise?
As others have mentioned, percentage can refer to any dimension. Which we are talking about depends on the item. A water bottle that is 20% bigger than another is almost certainly volume. If a garden hose is 50% bigger, were probably talking about length, although diameter or area would make sense too. I think when we refer to “size” of yo-yos, we are usually talking about diameter.
“I think a yo-yo has to be under 53mm to be undersized.”
“I like that throw, but 58mm is a little big for me.”
We talk about width and mass too, but diameter seems to be the primary parameter. So if a yo-yo is 66% the “size” of another, I would expect diameter. Of course these yo-yos are also 66% of the width, which means ~28% of the volume (and mass were density constant), as stated in the first post.
Note that if items are the same shape (ratio of dimensions), then you don’t need to know the formula, and can just cube the percent, as did, to find volume. Now the shape can change to make it not quite so light, by for instance, having thicker walls.
You mean @MoosaK
I’m a systems engineer but I never do math for free.