this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
420 points (99.8% liked)

196

16597 readers
1671 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Actively wrong.

PE(MD)(AS).

Parenthesis comes first, do everything in each of them as though they were a whole equation to themselves.

8/2(2+2) = 8/2(4)

Then you do your exponents. The equation doesn’t have any, so we can go ahead and skip those.

Multiplication and division are the same operation, just flipped around, so you go left to right and do those as you come across them. A number next to a parenthesis means multiplication, so to simplify:

8/2(4) = 8/2x4

8/2x4 = 4x4

4x4 = 16

Addition and subtraction don’t have any weird effects on the outcomes of each other, so you go left to right and do them as they come up. This equation has no more addition or subtraction to do, so we can consider what we have left our answer.

Therefore: 8/2(2+2)=16

This is straight from the textbook. You are wrong, and so are your purpose-built calculators.

EDIT: Replaced * with x to avoid italicising.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

You’re not wrong but ease off the throttle dude lol

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Replaced * with x to avoid italicising.

You can do this without needing to replace by using a backslash. 1*2 comes from 1\*2.

Anyway, the problem with your logic is that it's using rules designed for primary school by one random primary school teacher many decades ago. Not a rigorous mathematical convention.

In real maths, mathematicians frequently use juxtaposition to indicate multiplication at a higher priority than division. Rather than BIDMAS, something like BIJMDAS might work. But that isn't as catchy, and more to the point: it requires understanding of an operation that doesn't get used in primary school, so would be silly to put in to a mnemonic designed to aid probably school children.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just looked it up. Everything I know is a lie. Thank you, kind stranger on the internet. I’m going to go have an existential crisis, now.

[–] SmartmanApps 0 points 8 months ago

Everything I know is a lie

...including the comment you just replied to. Here is a thread with actual textbook references, historical Maths documents, worked examples, proofs, the works.

[–] SmartmanApps 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

the problem with your logic is that it’s using rules designed for primary school

Actually The Distributive Law is taught in Year 7. The Primary School rule, which doesn't include brackets with coefficients, is only the intermediate step.

many decades ago. Not a rigorous mathematical convention

It's an actual rule which is centuries old.

mathematicians frequently use juxtaposition to indicate multiplication

It's not multiplication - it's either The Distributive Law or Terms, which are 2 separate rules.

an operation that doesn’t get used in primary school

Yes, as I said it's taught in Year 7.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

When I was in school, year 7 was primary school.

Anyway, I'm the time that is relevant here is when you've done the various relevant mathematical tools, but haven't yet been exposed to multiplication by juxtaposition. Which I'm fairly sure for me at least was in year 6.

It’s an actual rule which is centuries old.

No, the idea of specifically codifying BIDMAS comes from the early 1900s.

I don't know why you're going throughout this thread over multiple hours spamming out your nonsense, but it's wrong. BIDMAS is a convention, and a very useful one, but only because we instinctively know juxtaposition actually comes before explicit multiplication or division, and a rigid primary school application of BIDMAS will lead you to the wrong answer.

Thankfully, I think you know that last part. Because I think that's what you mean when you keep saying "it's called terms". But that, too, is wrong. It's used in terms, for sure. y = 2x^2^ + 91/2)x - 4 contains three terms, the x^2^ term is 2x^2^, etc. But if I then changed the constant term to be 4(2 - 3×5) + 1, all of that would still only be the one term. Terms and multiplication by juxtaposition can work together, but fundamentally refer to entirely different aspects of mathematics. Juxtaposition is a notational thing, while terms are a fundamental aspect of the equation itself.

[–] SmartmanApps 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

When I was in school, year 7 was primary school

Oh really? My apologies then. I've only ever heard Year 7 called high school or middle school, never primary school. What country is that in?

multiplication by juxtaposition. Which I’m fairly sure for me at least was in year 6

I've seen some Year 6 classes do some pre-algebra (like "what number goes in this box to make this true"), but Year 7 is when it's properly first taught. Every textbook I've ever seen it in has been Year 7 (and Year 8, as revision).

Also, it's not "multiplication by juxtaposition", since it's not multiplication - it's The Distributive Law - which is Distribution - and/or Terms - which is a product, which is the result of a multiplication.

No, the idea of specifically codifying BIDMAS comes from the early 1900s

The order of operations rules are older than that - we can see in Lennes' letter (1917) that all the textbooks were already using it then, and Cajori says - in 1928 - that the order of operations rules are at least 300 years old (which now makes them at least 400 years old).

If you're talking about when was the mnemonic BIDMAS made up, that I don't know, but the mnemonics are only ways to remember the rules anyway, not the actual rules.

I don’t know why you’re going throughout this thread

I'm a Maths teacher, that's what we do. :-)

a rigid primary school application of BIDMAS will lead you to the wrong answer

Only if the bracketed term has a coefficient (welcome to how Texas Instruments gets the wrong answer), which is never the case in Primary School questions - that's taught in Year 7 (when we teach The Distributive Law).

juxtaposition actually comes before explicit multiplication... I think that’s what you mean when you keep saying “it’s called terms”

Terms come before operators, and we never call it juxtaposition, because The Distributive Law is also what people are calling "strong juxtaposition" (and/or "implicit multiplication"), but is a separate rule, so to lump 2 different rules together under 1 name is where a lot of people end up going wrong. There's a Youtube where the woman gets confused by a calculator's behaviour and she says "sometimes it obeys juxtaposition and sometimes it doesn't" (cos she lumped those 2 rules together), and I for one can see clear as day the issue is it's obeying Terms but not obeying The Distributive Law (but she lumped them together and doesn't understand these are 2 separate behaviours).

Terms and multiplication by juxtaposition can work together

But that's my point, there's no such thing as "multiplication by juxtaposition". A Term is a product, which is the result of a multiplication.

If a=2 and b=3 then...

axb=2x3 - 2 terms

ab=6 - 1 term

In the mnemonics "Multiplication" refers literally to multiplication signs, and nothing else. The Distributive Law is done as part of solving Brackets, and there's nothing that needs doing with Terms, since they're already simplified (unless you've been given some values for the pronumerals, in which case you can substitute in the values, but see above for the correct way to do this with ab, though you could also do (2x3), but absolutely never 2x3, cos then you just broke up the term, and get the wrong answer - brackets can't be removed unless there is only 1 term left inside. People writing 2(3)=2x3 are making the same mistake).

[–] SmartmanApps 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

8/2(2+2) = 8/2(4)

Then you do your exponents

You haven't finished Brackets yet! The next step is...

8/(2x4)=8/8

This is straight from the textbook

Not any textbook I've seen. Screenshot? Here's some actual textbooks

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Child, this thread is literally four months old. Get a life.

[–] SmartmanApps 2 points 8 months ago

Yeah, didn't think that came from any textbook.