Why is my English "worlds better" than yours but never "the best by worlds"?

Solution 1:

In this context, I think there is a semantic difference between worlds, on one hand, and miles, far and perhaps even way, on the other.

When expressing a comparative or superlative using miles and far, you are conveying a linear relationship along a single continuum (although I realize you could add a reference to many factors that contribute to that measure). Using @John Lawler's analysis of way, being derived from a long way, the approach is the same.

Worlds however, seems to be a categorical rather than a linear comparison. It is a plural, not a possessive, and seems to indicate that there are numerous spheres of experience that are significantly and qualitatively different. The referenced superior one is on a different plane from the competition. The reference to the First, Second and Third World in geopolitical and technical spheres (or New World and Old World) has a similar connotation of vastly differing characteristics, often accompanied by an implied preference (or disdain).

While one can contrast the relative betterness of two worlds, the bestness is more elusive since the existence of numerous non-linear spheres conveys at least potentially infinite numbers of possibilities, and, at least theoretically, there may be other worlds yet to be compared, that may exceed the present example.

And surely each of us goes through this cosmological analysis as we mentally compose our excited utterance acknowledging that your question is worlds better than my most recent one, and maybe is the best this year by far, but it is not the best by worlds (although it may be the world's best [but that means something else altogether]).