The reason this doesn’t work is because the “more” amd “less” competitors work on different things entirely. These are not mathematically correct statements in any way.
I think this is more so implying if-then statements rather than a literal mathematical representation:
If there is more cheese, then there is more holes. If there is more holes, then there is less cheese. Therefore, if there is more cheese, then there is less cheese.
The assumption that cheese has holes is not true. Many times I come home with cheese with no holes.
Yup! The first premise is wrong, since there is plenty of cheese without holes—meaning that more cheese does not imply or equal to more holes.
Can’t imagine the weight of air inside the holes is significant compared to the weight of cheese; taking a glance at the numbers, cheese is 800-900x more dense than air. Given cheese is sold by weight, more holes = very slightly less cheese, practically negligible.
Now I’m curious about how much space a block of 99% holes cheese would occupy. Maybe something like aerocheese, with a whole bunch of microscopic air bubbles throughout.
Also wrong. There’s an implied “than <other object>”. For the first one it’s “than a smaller piece of cheese with the same ratio of holes” and the second is “than a piece of cheese of the same size”.
The amount of cheese is the same
The holes just inflate it
Just like when you blow air into a balloon.
Checkmate Wisconsinites
Why so vaguely threatening? I just want to talk. Five minutes alone.
More holes = less cheese is the error.
More cheese = more holes is the error. Since the type of cheese isn’t specified, it would only apply to a small number of cheeses.
There is a cheese where the production got so good that they had no holes anymore so they added something to the cheese to get the “typical” holes back XD
But sadly forgot which cheese it was exactlf
Forget no more!
That was interesting thanks !
As the prophet Les McCann said, “Compared to what?”
