Sometimes I wish people would stop saying “exponential” when they just mean “fast” or “a lot.” Be careful what you wish for. From Benjamin F. Carlson in the Atlantic:
A Quantum Leap, marvels Simon Rogers at The Guardian in a post that graphs Bolt’s astonishing, logarithmic rise in speed.
I share your frustration with the abuse of the word “exponential.” Here’s a post I wrote on the subject.
Maybe he means the behavior of -log(x) as x goes to 0?
I think Carlson’s just a closet analytic number theorist.
OK, I’ll take the bait on “exponential”. When used colloquially, as it usually is, the word “exponential” is pretty clearly just a metaphor. If the context indicates that the writer (or speaker) is really attempting to use the precise mathematical sense of the word, but is doing so incorrectly, then perhaps a scolding is in order. But I would argue that this is rarely the case.
I’m reminded of the type of person who loves to point out that a woman cannot be “very pregnant”, she can only be pregnant or not pregnant. But “very pregnant” is a short, slightly humorous phrase which clearly communicates something that everybody understands.
By the way, Jordan, I am not accusing you of being this type of person. Tagging your post “pedantry” (as well as your allegory a while ago about passing the salt) indicates that you are not. And god knows I often find myself taking offense at phrases like “ATM machine” and “I could care less”. I just like myself better when I can successfully ignore my inner pedant!
PS–I agree that “logarithmic” in this context is just plain bewildering.
Me, I’m just waiting for the Cherenkov radiation as Usain Bolt approaches c….
The current headline at CNN is “Scientists discover massive ring around Saturn“. The story makes it clear that in CNN-speak, “massive” means “very large space-wise”, even when the objects described have very little mass.