Comment on I dunno
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 days agoEvery textbook with an answer key says you’re full of shit.
Physical calculators say you’re full of shit.
Advanced math programs say you’re full of shit.
You can keep talking, but you’re obviously just full of shit.
At some point you’re either so deep in denial you should speak Swahili, or else being wrong on purpose is the point. The answer in either case is shut the fuck up.
SmartmanApps@programming.dev 5 days ago
Says person who can’t find a Maths textbook that says a(bxc)=(abxac) 🙄
I’m gonna presume that’s why you keep claiming a(bxc)=(abxac) 🙄
says person still not doing that 😂
No it isn’t! 😂 2xn² is
Except for authors of Maths textbooks 😂
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
So no answer for centuries of textbooks saying you’re full of shit.
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
b*c is one term.
Show me one textbook where a(b+c)^2^ gets an a^2^ term. Here’s four in a row that say you’re full of shit.
SmartmanApps@programming.dev 5 days ago
No it isn’t! 😂
Image
says person who just proved they’re full of shit about what constitutes a Term 😂
FishFace@piefed.social 3 days ago
So b * c, which is a product of the variables b and c, is a term, according to this textbook.
You seem to be getting confused because none of the examples on this particular page feature the multiplication symbol ×. But that is because on the previous page, the author writes:
That means that the expression bc is just another way of writing b×c; it is treated the same other than requiring fewer strokes of the pen or presses on a keyboard, because this is just a *custom. That should clear up your confusion in interpreting this textbook (though really, the language is clear: you don’t dispute that b×c - or bc - are products, do you.)
Elsewhere in this thread you are clearly confused about what brackets mean. They are explained on page 20 of your textbook, where it says that you evaluate the expression inside the (innermost) brackets before doing anything else. Notice that, in its elucidation of several examples, involving addition and multiplication, the “distributive law” is not mentioned, because the distributive law has nothing to do with brackets and is not an operation.
Thus the expression 3 × (2 + 4) can be evaluated by first performing the summation inside the brackets to get 3 × 6 and then the product to get 18. The textbook then says that it is customary to omit the multiplication symbol and instead write 3(2+4), again indicating that these expressions are merely different ways of writing the same thing.
The exact same process of course must be followed whether numbers are represented by numerals or by letters designating a variable. You cannot do algebra if you don’t follow the same procedure in both cases. So consider the expression 2(a+b)². You have suggested that you must evaluate this as (2a+2b)² because you must “do brackets first”, but this is not what “doing brackets” means. You haven’t produced any authority to suggest that it is, and your own textbook makes it clear that “doing brackets” means do what is inside the brackets first. Not what is outside the brackets. Distributing 2 over a+b is not “doing brackets”; it is multiplication and comes afterwards.
If 2(a+b)² were equal to (2a+2b)² let us try with a=b=2. Let us first evaluate (2a+2b)²: it is equal to (2×2+2×2)² = (4+4)² = 8² = 64. Now let us evaluate 2(a+b)²: it is 2(2+2)² and now, following your textbook’s instruction to do what is inside the brackets first, this is equal to 2(4)². The next highest-priority operation is the exponent, giving us 2×16 (we now must write the × because it is an expression purely in numerals, with no brackets or variables) which is 32.
The fact that these two answers are different is because your understandings of what it means to “do brackets” and the distributive law are wrong.
Since I’m working off the textbook you gave, and I referred liberally to things in that textbook, I’m sure if you still disagree you will be able to back up your interpretations with reference to it.
By the way, I noticed this statement on page 23, regarding the order of operations:
it does rather seem like this rule is one established not by the fundamental laws of mathematics but by agreement as they say, does it not? Care to comment?
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
b*c is the product of b and c.
Show me one textbook where a(b+c)^2^ gets an a^2^ term. Here’s four in a row that say you’re full of shit.