In this case, the line length is equated to the product of the represented distance on earth and the distance on scale. In order to understand the linear and the logarithm scale, this paper explores the comparison of the linear and logarithm scales aligning them with clear differences and similarities.
The number of fish killed as a human hearing can better be measured using the logarithm scale than the linear scale. This is so because a change between two values, on a linear scale, is considered being the difference between the given values. For instance, the change from 0 to 500 in the linear scale, is perceived to be similar to the change between 500 to 1000. Different from this, on a logarithm scale, the changes between two values is considered as a ratio of the two values. This implies that a change from 1 to 10 in the logarithmic scale (ratio of 1:10) is considered to be a similar quantity of increase as the change from 10 to 100 (also a ratio of 1:10). The hearing sense considers equal frequency ratios as the pitch differences (Kipp 34).
Another difference between the two scale is that the logarithm scale can accommodate a great span in comparison to the linear scale. A logarithm scale operates like the case of zooming. For instance, accommodating 10000 fish killed by 1cm would need 10000cm for the linear scale. In a logarithmic scale each cm is taken to be tenfold hence accommodating 10000 fish killed in only 4cm. This means that in the case where the details over a small span should be visualized, linear scale will be appropriate, and in a case where the overall picture is on a large range like in the case of the number of fish killed, then, the logarithmic scale would be the most appropriate scale to be used (Parker 23). In this regard, using the value logarithms rather than the real value will minimize the wide range to form a size that is manageable. Linear scales cannot be used on the charts having the scales