Davoud wrote:

Anders Eklöf:
That woud be closer to mag. -9 than mag. 9

palsing:
No, definitely not mag -9, read this...

Mr. Eklöf didn't say -9 he said closer to -9.

well, is -9 the same as - 9, or - 9 ...
is -9 = -9 ?
or, is -9 = .0000000585657595855658 on you scale of numbnuts? How about accorns?