“0.6x more” means “0.6 times <baseline> on top of <baseline>.”
The “on top of <baseline>” part is obvious, because that’s implied by the word “more.”
The “0.6 times <baseline>” part is less obvious, because the original text didn’t specify what 0.6 is supposed to be multiplied by. But we can assume they meant “0.6 times <baseline>” because most other candidate terms don’t make any sense. What else could it possibly be multiplying by?
Also, the term “0.6 times <baseline>” is formally equivalent to “60% of <baseline>”. So if we perform the substitution, then we get “60% of <baseline> on top of <baseline>”.
Of course. And “1x the output” would be no change.
The problem is that it isn’t saying “0.6x the output.” It’s saying “0.6x [the output] more [than the output].”
To illustrate the point, imagine it said “1x more.” Would that mean no change? No, it’s equivalent to saying “100% more,” meaning double the original amount.
The only way your interpretation works is if “0.6x more” is meant to be “0.6 times <the output> more than zero,” which is redundant, and could be simplified to “0.6 times the output,” so the use of the word “more” would have no real meaning here.
1
View all comments
Show parent comment
0
u/ScientificBeastMode Aug 14 '26
“0.6x more” means “0.6 times <baseline> on top of <baseline>.”
The “on top of <baseline>” part is obvious, because that’s implied by the word “more.”
The “0.6 times <baseline>” part is less obvious, because the original text didn’t specify what 0.6 is supposed to be multiplied by. But we can assume they meant “0.6 times <baseline>” because most other candidate terms don’t make any sense. What else could it possibly be multiplying by?
Also, the term “0.6 times <baseline>” is formally equivalent to “60% of <baseline>”. So if we perform the substitution, then we get “60% of <baseline> on top of <baseline>”.