A fake Facebook event disguised as a math problem has been one of its top posts for 6 months
Technology
169
Beiträge
71
Kommentatoren
73
Aufrufe
-
G U I N U S.
I know it's probably a typo, but I'm enjoying it.
It's jeenyus you moran!
All I can envision with that alternative is Whoopi Goldberg with a very fanciful hat serving drinks in space.
-
on that note, can we please have parentheses in language. i keep making ambiguous sentences
My language teachers always told me it was bad form to use too much or even to nest parenthesis...
Then I found lisp...
-
So order of operations is hard?
Next they're going to have an epic debate on whether work done by the system is positive or negative and are all going to feel really smart and passionate about it. Like one of those Science vs Religion debate clubs from the 2000s
-
The same priority operations can be done in any order without affecting the result, that's why they can be same priority and don't need an explicit order.
6 × 4 ÷ 2 × 3 ÷ 9 evaluates the same regardless of order. Can you provide a counter example?
Another person already replied using your equation, but I felt the need to reply with a simpler one as well that shows it:
9-1+3=?
Subtraction first:
8+3=11Addition first:
9-4=5 -
100% with you. "Left to right" as far as I can tell only exists to make otherwise "unsolvable" problems a kind of official solution. I personally feel like it is a bodge, and I would rather the correct solution for such a problem to be undefined.
It's so we don't have to spam brackets everywhere
9+2-1+6-4+7-3+5=
Becomes
((((((9+2)-1)+6)-4)+7)-3)+5=
That's just clutter for no good reason when we can just say if it doesn't have parentheses it's left to right. Having a default evaluation order makes sense and means we only need parentheses when we want to deviate from the norm.
-
The issue normally with these "trick" questions is the ambiguous nature of that division sign (not so much a problem here) or people not knowing to just go left to right when all operators are of the same priority. A common mistake is to think division is prioritised above multiplication, when it actually has the same priority. Someone should have included some parenthesis in PEDMAS aka. PE(DM)(AS)
Another common issue is thinking "parentheses go first" and then beginning by solving the operation beside them (mostly multiplication). The point being that what's inside the parentheses goes first, not what's beside them.
-
Knowing basic arithmetic does not mean you know Math, and the fact you so hung up about this trivial aspect says a lot about you. Additionally, you express yourself like a boomer.
Hung up lol
See what you want to see ignorant one. Funny af.
-
Except it does matter. I left some examples for another post with multiplication and division, I'll give you some addition and subtraction to see order matter with those operations as well.
Let's take:
1 + 2 - 3 + 4Addition first:
(1 + 2) - (3 + 4)
3 - 7 = -4Subtraction first:
1 + (2 - 3) + 4
1 + (-1) + 4 = 4Right to left:
1 + (2 - (3 + 4))
1 + (2 - 7)
1 + (-5) = -4Left to right:
((1 + 2) - 3) + 4
(3 - 3) + 4 = 4Edit:
You can argue that, for example, the addition first could be(1 + 2) + (-3 + 4)in which case it does end up as 4, but in my opinion that's another ambiguous case.Oh, but of course the statement changes if you add parentheses. Basically, you’re changing the effective numbers that are being used, because the parentheses act as containers with a given value (you even showed the effective numbers in your examples).
Get this : + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1
You can change the result several times by choosing where you want to put the parentheses. However, the order of operations of same priority inside a container (parentheses) does not change the resulting value of the container.
In the example, there were no parentheses, so no ambiguity (there wouldn’t be any ambiguity with parentheses either, the correct way of calculating would just change), and I don’t think you can add “ambiguity” by adding parentheses — you’re just changing the effective expression to be evaluated.
By the way, this is the reason why I absolutely overuse parentheses in my engineering code. It can be redundant, but at least I am SURE that it is going to follow the order that I wanted.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Ah, yes. It's only for genius.
-
My language teachers always told me it was bad form to use too much or even to nest parenthesis...
Then I found lisp...
Lost In Stupid Parenthesis.
-
I like the version where these problems are made purposefully ambiguous so people will fight over it and raise the level of interaction
I like the version where these problems are made purposefully ambiguous
None of them are ambiguous. They all have only 1 correct answer, just like this one only has 1 correct answer. They all test if people remember the order of operations rules. Those who got it wrong, don't.
-
I like the version where these problems are made purposefully ambiguous
None of them are ambiguous. They all have only 1 correct answer, just like this one only has 1 correct answer. They all test if people remember the order of operations rules. Those who got it wrong, don't.
Lmao here we go
-
No, it should simply be "Parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, addition."
A division is defined as a multiplication, and a substraction is defined as an addition.
I am so confused everytime I see people arguing about this, as this is basic real number arithmetics that every kid in my country learns at 12 yo, when moving on from the simplified version you learn in elementary school.
A division is defined as a multiplication
No it isn't. Multiplication is defined as repeated addition. Division isn't repeated subtraction. They just happen to have opposite effects if you treat the quotient as being the result of dividing.
-
That's because (strictly speaking) they aren't teaching math. They're teaching "tricks" to solve equations easier, which can lead to more confusion.
Like the PEMDAS thing that's being discussed here. There's no such thing as "order of operations" in math, but it's easier to teach by assuming that there is.
Edit:
To the people downvoting: I want to hear your opinions. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, why?they aren’t teaching math.
Yes we are. Adults forgetting it is another matter altogether.
There’s no such thing as “order of operations” in math
Yes there is!
Do you think I’m wrong?
No, I know you're wrong.
If so, why?
If you don't solve binary operators before unary operators you get wrong answers. 2+3x4=14, not 20. 3x4=3+3+3+3 by definition
-
US teachers too lazy to teach kids actual maths did.
What’s lazy about learning PEMDAS? And what’s the non-lazy/superior way?
What’s lazy about learning PEMDAS?
Nothing. Only people who don't know what they're talking about say that.
-
A division is defined as a multiplication
No it isn't. Multiplication is defined as repeated addition. Division isn't repeated subtraction. They just happen to have opposite effects if you treat the quotient as being the result of dividing.
Yes, it is. The division of a by b in the set of real numbers and the set of rational numbers (which are, de facto, the default sets used in most professions) is defined as the multiplication of a by the multiplicative inverse of b. Alternative definitions are also based on a multiplication.
That's why divisions are called an auxilliary operation.
-
Those two things are memorisation tasks. Maths is not about memorisation.
You are not supposed to remember that the area of a triangle is
a * h / 2, you're supposed to understand why it's the case. You're supposed to be able to show that any triangle that can possibly exist is half the area of the rectangle it's stuck in: Start with the trivial case (right-angled triangle), then move on to more complicated cases. If you've understood that once, there is no reason to remember anything because you can derive the formula at a moment's notice.All maths can be understood and derived like that. The names of the colours, their ordering, the names of the planets and how they're ordered, they're arbitrary, they have no rhyme or reason, they need to be memorised if you want to recall them. Maths doesn't, instead it dies when you apply memorisation.
Ein Anfänger (der) Gitarre Hat Elan. There, that's the Guitar strings in German. Why do I know that? Because my music theory knowledge sucks. I can't apply it, music is all vibes to me but I still need a way to match the strings to what the tuner is displaying. You should never learn music theory from me, just as you shouldn't learn maths from a teacher who can't prove
a * h / 2, or thinks it's unimportant whether you can prove it.Maths is not about memorisation
It is for ROTE learners.
You are not supposed to remember that the area of a triangle is a * h / 2
Yes you are. A lot of students get the wrong answer when they forget the half.
you’re supposed to understand why it’s the case
Constructivist learners can do so, ROTE learners it doesn't matter. As long as they all know how to do Maths it doesn't matter if they understand it or not.
You’re supposed to be able to show that any triangle that can possibly exist is half the area of the rectangle it’s stuck in
No they're not.
If you’ve understood that once, there is no reason to remember anything because you can derive the formula at a moment’s notice.
And if you haven't understood it then there is a reason to remember it.
you can derive the formula at a moment’s notice
Students aren't expected to be able to do that.
All maths can be understood and derived like that
It can be by Constructivist learners, not ROTE learners.
The names of the colours, their ordering, the names of the planets and how they’re ordered, they’re arbitrary
No they're not. Colours are in spectrum order, the planets are in order from the sun.
Maths doesn’t, instead it dies when you apply memorisation
A very substantial chunk of the population does just fine with having memorised Maths.
-
What fundamental property of the universe says that
6 + 4 / 2 is 8 instead of 5?
6 + 4 / 2 is 8 instead of 5?
The fundamental property of Maths that you have to solve binary operators before unary operators or you end up with wrong answers.
-
Nothing. And that's why people don't write equations like that: You either see
4 6 + --- 2or
6 + 4 ------- 2If you wrote
6 + 4 / 2in a paper you'd get reviewers complaining that it's ambiguous, if you want it to be on one line write(6+4) / 2or6 + (4/2)or6 + ⁴⁄₂or even½(6 + 4)Working mathematicians never came up with PEMDAS, which disambiguates it without parenthesis, US teachers did. Noone else does it that way because it does not, in the slightest, aid readability.And that’s why people don’t write equations like that
Says someone who clearly hasn't looked in any Maths textbooks
If you wrote 6 + 4 / 2 in a paper you’d get reviewers complaining that it’s ambiguous
Only if their Maths was very poor. #MathsIsNeverAmbiguous
Working mathematicians never came up with PEMDAS
Yes they did.
which disambiguates it without parenthesis
It was never ambiguous to begin with.
Noone else does it that way
Says someone who has never looked in a non-U.S. Maths textbooks - BIDMAS, BODMAS, BEDMAS, all textbooks have one variation or another.
-
You might be smart, but you’re still wrong about the importance of order of operations; especially in algebra.
As far as teachers go, you’re being a dick by generalizing all (US) teachers are lazy and do not understand math.
Pro tip: opinions are like assholes; you too have one, and yes it too stinks.
You might be smart
Smart-arse more like. A serial troll who doesn't actually know what they're talking about.
