The biggest I’ve seen in a published source in the wild is an 80-fold error in a reported distance, which I think came from a series of at least three unit conversions and area/length misinterpretations.
The biggest I’ve seen in a published source in the wild is an 80-fold error in a reported distance, which I think came from a series of at least three unit conversions and area/length misinterpretations.
Did you not notice the unit modifier in the my second phrase???
Let me spell it out for you.
3 (three) ’ (feet) ^2 (squared)
You’d have me repeating myself like a monkey, which is, NINE.
3 (three) sq (square) ft (feet) is THREE.
but I suspect you’ll disagree at at this point I’ll move on, my only sadness is there was a person out there who agreed with your original argument that they were the same.
Tell me what “three plus four squared” is.