but the order of operations it’s not well defined with respect to regular explicit multiplication
The only type of multiplication there is is explicit. Neither Terms nor The Distributive Law is classed as “multiplication”
There is no single clear norm or convention
There is a single, standard, order of operations rules
Also, see my thread about people who say there is no evidence/proof/convention - it almost always ends up there actually is, but they didn’t look (or didn’t want you to look)
The reason why so many people disagree is that
…they have forgotten about Terms and/or The Distributive Law, and are trying to treat a Term as though it’s a “multiplication”, and it’s not. More soon
conflicting conventions about the order of operations for implied multiplication
Let me paraphrase - people disagree about made-up rule
Weak juxtaposition
There’s no such thing - there’s either juxtaposition or not, and if there is it’s either Terms or The Distributive Law
construct “viral math problems” by writing a single-line expression (without a fraction) with a division first and a
…factorised term after that
Note how none of them use a regular multiplication sign, but implicit multiplication to trigger the ambiguity.
There’s no ambiguity…
multiplication sign - multiplication
brackets with no multiplication sign (i.e. a coefficient) - The Distributive Law
no multiplication sign and no brackets - Terms (also called products by some. e.g. Lennes)
If it’s a school test, ask you teacher
Why didn’t you ask a teacher before writing your blog? Maths tests are only ever ambiguous if there’s been a typo. If there’s no typo’s then there’s a right answer and wrong answers. If you think the question is ambiguous then you’ve not studied enough
maybe they can write it as a fraction to make it clear what they meant
This question already is clear. It’s division, NOT a fraction. They are NOT the same thing! Terms are separated by operators and joined by grouping symbols. 1÷2 is 2 terms, ½ is 1 term
you should probably stick to the weak juxtaposition convention
You should literally NEVER use “weak juxtaposition” - it contravenes the rules of Maths (Terms and The Distributive Law)
strong juxtaposition is pretty common in academic circles
…and high school, where it’s first taught
(6/2)(1+2)=9
If that was what was meant then that’s what would’ve been written - the 6 and 2 have been joined together to make a single term, and elevated to the precedence of Brackets rather than Division
written in an ambiguous way without telling you what they meant or which convention to follow
You should know, without being told, to follow the rules of Maths when solving it. Voila! No ambiguity
to stir up drama
It stirs up drama because many adults have forgotten the rules of Maths (you’ll find students get this right, because they still remember)
Calculators are actually one of the reasons why this problem even exists in the first place
No, you just put the cart before the horse - the problem existing in the first place (programmers not brushing up on their Maths first) is why some calculators do it wrong
“line-based” text, it led to the development of various in-line notations
Yes, we use / to mean divide with computers (since there is no ÷ on the keyboard), which you therefore need to put into brackets if it’s a fraction (since there’s no fraction bar on the keyboard either)
With most in-line notations there are some situations with conflicting conventions
More often than not even the same manufacturer uses different conventions
According to this video mostly not these days (based on her comments, there’s only Texas Instruments which isn’t obeying both Terms and The Distributive Law, which she refers to as “PEJMDAS” - she didn’t have a manual for the HP calcs). i.e. some manufacturers who were doing it wrong have switched back to doing it correctly
P.S. she makes the same mistake as you, and suggests showing her video to teachers instead of just asking a teacher in the first place herself (she’s suggesting to add something to teaching which we already do teach. i.e. ab=(axb)).
none of those two calculators is “wrong”
ANY calculator which doesn’t obey all the rules of Maths is wrong!
Bugs are – by definition – unintended behaviour. That is not the case here
So a calculator, which has a specific purpose of solving Maths expressions, giving a wrong answer to a Maths expression isn’t “unintended behaviour”? Do go on
Did I say Israel loves killing children? Nice strawman you got there.
The thing is, Israel doesn’t care if Palestinian children die. Israel doesn’t care if Palestinian civilians die. I’m saying that they should care about this. But then, people like you start calling us antisemitic.
no, and I never said you did. the meme on the other hand did. nice strawman got got there.
in the meme the bug representing israel says that it doesn’t matter who it kills (including children), it just loves killing. then I called the meme antisemitic for this.
Israel doesn’t care if Palestinian children die. Israel doesn’t care if Palestinian civilians die. I’m saying that they should care about this.
I agree with all three statements and never said otherwise.
But then, people like you start calling us antisemitic.
I only called those people who say that Isreal likes killing children antisemitic. But by saying “us” you seem to indentify with those I call antisemitic…
I had two email addresses throughout all of highschool. The one I gave to adults if they asked, firstname-lastname@, and the one I used to sign into msn and give to all my friends… I forget the exact address but it was definitely along the lines of “hotpants-sexi.kitty.87@”
The former is still my primary email. The other one is sitting abandoned since I was 17 and smart enough to realise what a stupid idea it was, but I never deleted it and I can’t even remember it.
I think a lot of this joke refers to the Roman god Mars, and the Roman Goddess Venus, more than it does the planetary bodies. Roman and Greek mythology both have a lot of gender fuckery, so I think it’s pretty appropriate.
That bing AI thing says there’s somewhere around 65 to 70 named Roman deities, so I’m gonna make a call and say that there are probably 69 genders.
I‘d still use my gmx address from 2003 if it wasn’t for me opting in the free premium trial (I provided no information) that did not have an opt out option and then they banned my account…
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.