 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Really can't work out if I have contradicted myself here:
The decrease in ambient temperature is inversely proportional to the increase in elevation.
i.e with an increase in elevation there is a decrease in temperature.
Perhaps one of the resident pedants could help.
Cheers!
Why not just simplfy it as you have done above?
It gets colder the higher you go.
Yes it does, but I was expecting more buffalo 😉
I could, but it doesn't completely describe the relationship, the 'proportional' part.
I think it should be:
The decrease in ambient temperature is proportional to the increase in elevation.
Now if I could get Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo somewhere I would be onto something....
There is an inversely proportional relationship between ambient temperature levels and altitude. ?
Second one.
The decrease in ambient temperature is proportional to the increase in elevation and subsequent decrease in atmospheric pressure.
Agreed - inverse and increase is surely overdoing it - one or tother?
Yes makes perfect sense. But i'm not pedant
My head hurts.
Speedy edit almightydutch.
The decrease in ambient temperature is inversely proportional to the increase in elevation.
Hmm, that actually says something other than what you want. What you mean is this:
[b]Ambient temperature is inversely proportional to elevation.[/b]
Your sentence means that when you change some other unspecified variable, the amount by which the elevation changes is inversely proportional to the amount by which the temperature changes. You're accidentally discussing the differential of both things 🙂 If both things were linear with respect to the other unspecified quantity then your sentence would be baffling but still technically correct.
Use what I wrote in bold and you'll be fine.
Wot molgrips saidAmbient temperature is inversely [s]proportional[/s] related to elevation
Well it's proportional if 100m results in 1C change and another 100m results in another 1C. It's not, in reality, but it's a reasonable model in very rough terms for mountaineers etc to use. So that might be ok for the OP to say.
[img] 
[/img]
The English is horrible and the statement is wrong.
Or,if you want to be long-winded, use the word 'change' rather than increase and decrease in your original sentence ( and ignore those who dispute the facts of the matter 😉 )
Try this one on for size:
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously
Cheers everyone, yep I am aware that it is a simple flawed model, as are most.
Think Molgrips hit it on the head.