If it's 0° celsius today and next day is going to be two

-143 celsius

halfway to absolute zero kelvin from 0 celsius

[Insert global warming meme here]

>>8248328
might want to double-check your math there fampai

Convert 0 degrees celcius to the amount of heat in the atmosphere at that temperature, divide by two, convert back to temp.

Raining pussies

>>8248321
-35.5556c

>>8248321
0° C is 32° F.

So 2 times colder is 32 - 2(32) = -32° F = -35.5556° C.

: ^ )

>>8248630
One again proving America is the only country that matters.

>two times colder

ermm

>>8248321
20°C is baseline comfortable temperature, so twice as cold as 0°C is -20°C

nice try treating an affine space as if it was a vector space

>>8248321
-00°C

>>8248321
>going to be two times colder,
two times colder than what? "Colder" is a relationship between two things, it's meaningless to just say that something is "colder".

>>8249220
Two time colder than 0°C you literal retard. Did you even read the OP?

-183°C

>>8248773
Is that an affine space? There exists the lowest possible temperature

>>8248321
40° C on Mars

>>8249273
>Two time colder than 0°C
Two times colder than itself? I don't think you understand how numbers work.

>>8249484
Dude do you have autism? Let me ask the same question as the OP but in a way that's dumbed down for you.
I ran at 6 mph today, and tomorrow I'm going to run twice as fast, what speed will I run tomorrow?
OP's question is obviously stupid but not for the reason you think.

>>8249521
"Faster" has widely accepted reference point - the speed of the ground.
"Colder" doesn't have a reference point like that, so it's necessary to explicitly specify one to avoid ambiguity.

>>8249220
Yeah this guy is correct

>>8249524
Fair enough, but I don't understand why you think I don't understand how numbers work. If we are looking at it numerically, OP is just asking what X times 2 is. It's just stupid because X=0 in this case.

>>8248321
Human body is at stasis is 37 degrees, so twice as cold as 0 would be -37 degrees Celsius.

File: 1465789290955.jpg (26KB, 313x254px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 313x254px

-17.7 celsius?

-136.575 Celsius

>>8248758
This tbqh

>>8248321
This is a perfect example of how mathematical terms dont always have real interpretations.

You could do it with Fahrenheit or Kelvin, but Kelvin would be more practical. This tells us if we had half as much heat, not how cold you would feel.

>>8248773
This post was frustrating me so much. Thanks for clearing that up mathematically for me.

>>8249306
The key word is distinguished origin, as we have kelvin, Celsius and Fahrenheit all having different origins. Thus "halving" it is not mathematically sound.

>>8249943
> This tells us if we had half as much heat, not how cold you would feel.

You got the best point here, dude.