3 ms·

There are the words "a multiple of" in the parent post, just before the words "energy and maintenance costs" Which means that ICE Vehicle energy and maintenanc

There are the words "a multiple of" in the parent post, just before the words "energy and maintenance costs" Which means that ICE Vehicle energy and maintenance costs are a multiple of (i.e. several times that of) EV energy and maintenance costs. And so EV energy and maintenance costs are a fraction of the ICE energy and maintenance costs. You can debate this assertion if you like, but first you have to read it successfully.

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
defrost 6mo ago
The multiplication factor can't be a third?
- SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
  That's not how the phrase "x is a multiple of y" is typically used, so colloquiality speaking: no it can't be 1/3. That would be a submultiple If your argument is about the actual running costs of EVS and ICE Vehicles: also no.
  - defrost 6mo ago
    So, it is in fact used that way sometimes then. I have no argument, just an observation that for six decades I've always taken multiplier to possibly mean any positive, negative, or zero value, rational or irrational, etc.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
      > So, it is in fact used that way sometimes then. No, and that's the point of using a different word "submultiple". > I've always taken multiplier "a multiple of" is not the same thing as "multiplier". Or "submultiple" either. Different words have different meanings. So not relevant. > to possibly mean any positive, negative, or zero value, rational or irrational, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/multiple https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/multiple multiple, noun: the product of a quantity by an integer. So no.
neya 6mo ago
> but first you have to read it successfully. 1/2 * x What do you think 1/2 here is? Stick to doom.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
  > What do you think 1/2 here is? I think it's a ratio between two integers. If you have a point to make here, you also first have to write it successfully.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

defrost 6mo ago

The multiplication factor can't be a third?

SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
That's not how the phrase "x is a multiple of y" is typically used, so colloquiality speaking: no it can't be 1/3. That would be a submultiple If your argument is about the actual running costs of EVS and ICE Vehicles: also no.
- defrost 6mo ago
  So, it is in fact used that way sometimes then. I have no argument, just an observation that for six decades I've always taken multiplier to possibly mean any positive, negative, or zero value, rational or irrational, etc.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
    > So, it is in fact used that way sometimes then. No, and that's the point of using a different word "submultiple". > I've always taken multiplier "a multiple of" is not the same thing as "multiplier". Or "submultiple" either. Different words have different meanings. So not relevant. > to possibly mean any positive, negative, or zero value, rational or irrational, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/multiple https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/multiple multiple, noun: the product of a quantity by an integer. So no.

neya 6mo ago

> but first you have to read it successfully. 1/2 * x What do you think 1/2 here is? Stick to doom.

SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
> What do you think 1/2 here is? I think it's a ratio between two integers. If you have a point to make here, you also first have to write it successfully.