It will be important to realize that the changes projected by the papers will inevitably vary from what would (or will) actually happen, but the probability that they will be
off by orders of magnitude seems quite small.
Some of the figures quoted in the original post are
off by orders of magnitude, and even better estimates in some of the commentary are probably erroneous.
Sometimes answers are
off by orders of magnitude, and the whole idea slips unnoticed.»
Before we understood those, we were
off by orders of magnitude.
Before we understood the process of nuclear fusion, we were
off by orders of magnitude.
But Frank Mauro of the Democratic - leaning Fiscal Policy Institute said he'd tried to do the math on Wilson's calculations and concluded that the additional taxes he projects are «
off by an order of magnitude.»
If you mean that Amazon is only 30 % of the ebook market, I'd like to see your figures, because not only is that lowest figure I've ever seen floated in the past four years, this data is the first time self - published ebooks have been really accounted for and it suggests that any estimates we're getting to date could be
off by an order of magnitude.
But you're
off by an order of magnitude on the horses... It is a $ 40 billion industry in the US — that's just the «recreational» side.
Even if I'm
off by an order of magnitude, we're still talking about many hundreds of years.
It was a typo and God only knows how many people failed to notice it was
off by an order of magnitude.
An agreement at the level of some statistical significance in the fit is a good hint that there may be something real that causes that agreement, but as long as the physical calculations are
off by an order of magnitude we certainly are missing a real explanation.
Even if they are
off by an order of magnitude, a 6 meter rise in sea level will dramatically alter the coastlines of the world.
Not exact matches
In any case, «The classical theory
of nucleation has turned out to be
off - target
by several
orders of magnitude in some systems when it comes [to] quantitative predictions.»
They differ
by orders of magnitude, hundreds
of times, and some are
off by a thousand-fold.
«Just in defining the industry, they are literally
off the mark
by many
orders of magnitude and tens
of billions
of dollars,» Hoopes said in an email.
(The «I think» was because I was hoping to extricate myself from CE for a while to finish
off a paper explaining why climate sensitivity as currently defined can neither be measured nor estimated with an error bar less than 1 C per doubling, and proposing a different definition that shrinks the error bar
by an
order of magnitude.
That particular scattering (or absorption) cross-section turns out to be only
of the
order of 5 * 10 ^ -22 m ^ 2, so I was
off by many, many
orders of magnitude.
You wrote: «You're
off by several
orders of magnitude».
You're
off by several
orders of magnitude.
I made a math error and was
off by 3
orders of magnitude — the actual temperature change is 0.1 degrees, and I can easily see that as measureable.
Despite the fact that this number may be
off by several
orders of magnitude, it is a ludicrously small number.