Comment on I dunno

• SmartmanApps@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Don’t move the goalposts

  I didn’t. You’re the one who has been desperately trying to make a False Equivalence argument between a(b+c) and a(bc)² 🙄

  I’ve posted textbooks showing that “solving brackets” only applies to the inside,

  No you haven’t. A college refresher isn’t a Maths textbook, and I already pointed out to you that they don’t mention The Distributive Law at all, unlike, you know, high school Maths textbooks 🙄

  distribution is part of multiplication

  And the high school Maths textbooks I posted prove you are wrong about that 🙄

  and optional

  And the high school Maths textbooks I posted prove you are wrong about that too, 🙄 unless you think “optional” is a valid interpretation of what “must” means 😂

  You’ve said yourself your magic rule is taught in highschool,

  Yep

  so a refresher course in college would never ignore it

  And yet you proved that they did in fact forget about it 🙄

  Now instead of giving weak excuses

  they say to person who has been backed up by every textbook they posted so far 😂

  provide your part of the proof.

  Just scroll back dude - they’re all still there, like here for example.

  And I’m not talking about multiplication

  Well that’ll be a nice change then 😂

  I want to see anywhere where a distribution is given precedence over an exponent

  Because you are hell bent on making a False Equivalence argument between a(b+c) and a(bc)². I don’t care dude. there is no exponent in the meme. I’ll take that as an admission that you are wrong about a(b+c) then.

  source

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Who are you talking to?

    All I said was: If 5(4)^2^ is 516, like this college math textbook shows, then 2(8)^2^ is 264.

    Every published example will agree this is how it works. None, at any level of education, will agree with your bullshit.

    source