Math (I’m a graduate student). And “exponentially more experienced than the average” means nothing as exponential is a progression, not a comparison between two values.
My pet peeve with mathy stuff, “something is X times closer/smaller etc than something else”
If A is 1 away, saying B is ten times closer means what exactly? Is B 10 away? 9, 0.1?
I think what most examples are trying to say is that A is ten times the distance to B, but the way it is said if just annoying.
“Ten times closer” is pretty unambiguously 0.1. What starts getting more confusing is “300% further” which is technically 4 but many understand as 3 (try replacing by 50%, 50% further is 1.5 not 0.5). Also “50% closer” being the same as twice closer while 50% further is only 1.5x further can get confusing too, and it gets even worse with “50% slower” - is speed now 1/1.5 (= it takes 50% more time) or 0.5/1 (= speed is reduced by 50%) ?
Math (I’m a graduate student). And “exponentially more experienced than the average” means nothing as exponential is a progression, not a comparison between two values.
What this person is trying to say is they are exponentially better at being technically correct.
My pet peeve with mathy stuff, “something is X times closer/smaller etc than something else”
If A is 1 away, saying B is ten times closer means what exactly? Is B 10 away? 9, 0.1?
I think what most examples are trying to say is that A is ten times the distance to B, but the way it is said if just annoying.
“Ten times closer” is pretty unambiguously 0.1. What starts getting more confusing is “300% further” which is technically 4 but many understand as 3 (try replacing by 50%, 50% further is 1.5 not 0.5). Also “50% closer” being the same as twice closer while 50% further is only 1.5x further can get confusing too, and it gets even worse with “50% slower” - is speed now 1/1.5 (= it takes 50% more time) or 0.5/1 (= speed is reduced by 50%) ?
Most of the time it is pretty easy to know what the winter is trying to imply.
It gets really silly when using big numbers. e.g. a nanometre is 100,000 times smaller than a human hair.
serious questions then:
What’s a better mathy adjective to describe what OP meant by “exponential”?
A simple “a lot” would do fine. “Orders of magnitude” as someone else suggested would work too.