<blockquote>
<p>the coldest temperature is -129 F, and few places ever get anywhere near that.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is at high altitudes in Antarctica. There are very few places with weather stations (geographically) near there.</p>
<p>There are more places with weather stations near the hottest places, so (because mathematical statistics theorem) there are more record max readings near the global max.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-15T03:27:48.903Z
2020-07-15T03:27:48.903Z
Keith McClary
<p>I see from a news report that the all-time high temperature, anywhere on Earth, is 129 F. But temperatures within 10 degrees of that record are not rare, and temperatures within 20 degrees are pretty widespread. Why does there seem to be a ceiling on the high temperature, such that a lot of places approach that temperature and don't exceed it? A related question -- why isn't the high temperature much higher, such as, I don't know, 150 degrees?</p>
<p>In contrast, the coldest temperature is -129 F, and few places ever get anywhere near that. Why is there such a disparity between high temperatures and low temperatures in that way?</p>
<p>EDIT: By the way, I apologize for the US-centric temperature measurements. I hope I got the point across nonetheless.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-14T09:16:00.187Z
Your related question should be posted as a separate one, it's better to keep one question per post. As for the main question itself: you seem to assume that temperatures follow a normal distribution, but there is no reason for it being this way. It could very well follow a log-normal distribution, or something else.
Jean-Marie Prival
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-14T17:13:33.363Z
@Jean-MariePrival Thanks for responding. Yes, one question per post is a good idea. I don't believe that I'm making any assumptions about the distribution of temperatures; what I see is that there is apparently an asymmetry between high and low temperatures, and I'm wondering if someone has an explanation for that.
Robert Dodier
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-14T17:15:50.817Z
@a_donda I guess the units of measurement are a distraction. I'm pretty sure, though, that the question would be essentially the same in any units, and also essentially the same whether the high temperature were 129 or 134 or 132 or whatever.
Robert Dodier
<meteorology><temperature>
Why are temperatures within a few degrees of the all-time high actually pretty common?
Robert Dodier
# Why are temperatures within a few degrees of the all-time high actually pretty common?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-07-14)

I see from a news report that the all-time high temperature, anywhere on Earth, is 129 F. But temperatures within 10 degrees of that record are not rare, and temperatures within 20 degrees are pretty widespread. Why does there seem to be a ceiling on the high temperature, such that a lot of places approach that temperature and don't exceed it? A related question -- why isn't the high temperature much higher, such as, I don't know, 150 degrees?

In contrast, the coldest temperature is -129 F, and few places ever get anywhere near that. Why is there such a disparity between high temperatures and low temperatures in that way?

EDIT: By the way, I apologize for the US-centric temperature measurements. I hope I got the point across nonetheless.

**Tags:** meteorology, temperature

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Your related question should be posted as a separate one, it's better to keep one question per post. As for the main question itself: you seem to assume that temperatures follow a normal distribution, but there is no reason for it being this way. It could very well follow a log-normal distribution, or something else.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 Thanks for responding. Yes, one question per post is a good idea. I don't believe that I'm making any assumptions about the distribution of temperatures; what I see is that there is apparently an asymmetry between high and low temperatures, and I'm wondering if someone has an explanation for that.  
> **username_0**: @a_donda I guess the units of measurement are a distraction. I'm pretty sure, though, that the question would be essentially the same in any units, and also essentially the same whether the high temperature were 129 or 134 or 132 or whatever.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-07-15. Score: 1

> the coldest temperature is -129 F, and few places ever get anywhere near that.

This is at high altitudes in Antarctica. There are very few places with weather stations (geographically) near there.

There are more places with weather stations near the hottest places, so (because mathematical statistics theorem) there are more record max readings near the global max.


---

