Comment on I dunno

• SmartmanApps@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Like how the 5 in the first image isn’t?

  BWAHAHAHAHAHA! And how exactly do you think they got from 5(17) to 85 without distributing?? 🤣 Spoiler alert, this is what they actually did…

  5(17)=(5x17)=85

  They do that throughout the book, because they think it’s so trivial to get from 5(17) to 85, that if you don’t know how to do it without writing (5x17) first, then you have deeper problems than just not knowing how to Distribute 😂

  source

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    5(17) means they didn’t distribute 5(3+14) into 53+514.

    These textbooks unambiguously disagree.

    source

    • SmartmanApps@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      5(17) means they didn’t distribute 5(3+14) into 53+514

      That’s right, they Distributed the 5(17) into (5x17), and your point is?

      These textbooks unambiguously disagree

      With you, yes, and your point is?

      source

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        The first textbook only gets 5(17) by not doing what the second textbook says to do with 5(3+14).

        First image says ‘always simplify inside,’ and shows that.

        Second image says ‘everything inside must be multiplied,’ and shows that.

        You’re such an incompetent troll that you proved yourself wrong within the same post.

        source

        • -> View More Comments