The weatherman has made a very poor choice in phrasing, even if it weren't zero degrees. For starters, we don't know if this is Celcius or Fahrenheit. And terms like "twice" or "half" are only meaningful in an absolute scale, which neither Celcius nor Fahrenheit is. Also, "twice as cold" is not very meaningful, because cold refers to the absence of heat. Multiplicative multipliers are only meaningful when applied to an affirmative measurement, like "height," not to its descriptive opposite, like "shortness." We kind of understand that "twice as short" probably means "half as tall," but only the latter is really clear.
If it were, say, twenty degrees, and the weatherman said it would be twice as cold the next day, we might understand that tomorrow will be ten degrees, but it's not clear. Twice as cold as zero degrees might mean half the absolute temperature. If this is Celcius, then zero degrees is 273.15 Kelvins, an absolute scale. Half this is 136.58 Kelvin, which is -136.58 degrees Celcius, which is nearly fifty Celcius degrees colder than the record low temperature on the surface of planet Earth. Zero degrees Fahrenheit is colder than zero degrees Celcius, so half that would be even colder than the temperature given above.
2007-05-29 01:08:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by DavidK93 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
A scientist or engineer likely would use an absolute temperature scale (Kelvin or Rankine) but a weatherman likely would use a number that "feels" twice as cold, doubling the heat loss from a person's exposed skin. Take exposed skin temperature at zero and find the temperature differential then double the differential. Wind chill is also based on what a person feels since exposed metal can not get colder at higher wind speeds.
2007-05-29 02:20:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Kes 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The weatherman is kidding you. "Twice as cold" as 0 °F would be -230 °F (halfway to absolute zero).
Or if you're using centigrade, twice as cold as 0 °C would be
-136.6 °C.
2007-05-29 01:10:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by morningfoxnorth 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
0 x itself = 0
2007-05-29 01:09:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Frith 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
it may be a joke, but if you look at it quite critically, this may be possible.
if it is in Farenheit scale, zero degrees is -17.78 degree celsius
double it, tomorrow could be -35.56
dude, that is so so cold.
note: if you use celsius instead of farenheit, it will be hotter instead of colder, so the choice of using celsius is not right.
2007-05-29 01:17:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Aj 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Find out what the temperature was the previous day and go from there.
2007-05-29 01:30:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by trey98607 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I t is either -- 35.56 C as Aj has given,
or 16 F i e -- 9 C.
2007-05-29 01:59:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Elango 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it will be -2 degrees... but i'm not sure
2007-05-29 01:15:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
that's weird! it is probibly 0 degrees
2007-05-29 05:47:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by ~*LEAH*~ 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think any meteorologist would talk like that
2007-05-29 01:13:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by Kalyansri 5
·
0⤊
0⤋