Guys, I am so terrible at math that I cannot wrap my brain around this, and it's a little embarrassing: is -0.04 really smaller than -0.002? The extra zero in -0.002 makes it look like it's the smaller number, to me.

t edit I can put it another way: does -0.002 fall within the range of -0.04 to 0.03? (This is a statistical question for an author, and to me it looks like -0.002 is not within that range, because it's smaller than the low end [-0.04], but the author says that -0.04 is a smaller number than -0.002, therefore -0.002 is within that range.)

Yes it is smaller, Steph. If you multiply them by 100, .04 = 40 while .002 = 2.

It's because it's negative that it's confusing, maybe? I wish I had a number line on my desk right now! -.002 is between -.04 and 0, and then .03 is on the other side of zero.

In the same way that -40 < -2, yeah. .002 is a smaller number than .04, but the negatives have to be taken into account. If you owe more money you have less net worth, for example.

Eta: yes, it's within the range. This is totally a job for a number line.

–0.04 is less than –0.002.

–0.002 falls within the range of –0.04..0.03.

Thinking in terms of “bigger” and “smaller” doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when you have negative numbers.

Okay -- like I said, I can't get my brain around it. If it really does fall within the range, then I'm good. Thanks!

Okay, now will someone explain hierarchical linear modeling to me?? That's the thing I have to understand for my job this week. Right now I'm at the "okay they've got these bits of data, they do magic magic magic annnnnnd PROFIT!" stage.

Beyond my off the cuff scope, lisah, but it sounds interesting.

Target. Move-in week for nearby colleges. Don't.

It's hot and ungodly humid here--bad time for a power outage. More than 2,500 homes are affected in my area.

Good thing I decided not to do laundry but go to a friend's house instead.

Eta: And the power's back. Given the extent of the outage I feared it'd be out for a long time.