mindbleach
@mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
- Comment on I dunno 8 hours ago:
There’s no sense in which it does refer to the result you mean.
“a X b is written ab.” Modern Algebra: Structure And Method, page 36.
Go ahead and try it out and let me know how you go.
- Comment on I dunno 9 hours ago:
- Comment on He took it literally 17 hours ago:
The nature of bad faith is that there is no right asnwer.
- Comment on I dunno 19 hours ago:
Oh yeah, had a laugh at some RPN guy saying, ‘Hey you should check this thesis specifically about order of operations.’
This dipshit: “I already know what it’ll be - a University person who’s forgotten about Terms and The Distributive Law - they’re ALL like that.”
All of them! Wow! What a coincidence!
Isn’t it fucking crazy how everyone in the world is wrong about this, and math still works?
- Comment on I dunno 20 hours ago:
Because of one troll harassing people to insist 2(8)^2^ is 256 and RPN has invisible brackets.
- Comment on I dunno 20 hours ago:
If you’ve written a(b)², then you mean (a×b)²
When shown a textbook that explicitly distinguishes 6(ab)^3^ meaning 6(ab)(ab)(ab) and (6ab)^3^ meaning (6ab)(6ab)(6ab), they accidentally got it right whilst sneering and inventing their sPeCiAl cAsE:
6a²b²=6(ab)²
They can’t even keep their horseshit straight when their inane pivots to division are directly addressed. Every response begins “nuh uh!” and backfills whatever needs to be true for you to be wrong and them to be smarterer.
They’re just full of shit.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
Fuck where this started - you’re here now, saying 2(8)^2^ is anything but 128. You’re that wrong about basic fucking algebra, whilst sneering at everyone else.
Here’s four textbooks across two centuries where a(b+c)^x^ is not (ac+bc)^x^.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
So when you sneer that rules and notation are different, you don’t know what those words mean.
Or you’re so devoid of internality that when someone says ‘imagine a different notation,’ you literally can’t.
There’s no pretending, It’s there in the textbooks
Show me any textbook that gets the answers you insist on. Show me one textbook where a(b+c)^2^ squares a.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
No you can’t!
Yes we could, because it’s a theoretical different notation. Mathematics itself does not break down, if you have to put add explicit brackets to 1/(ab).
Mathematics does break down when you insist a(b)^2^ gets an a^2^ term, for certain values of b. It’s why you’ve had to invent exceptions to your made-up rules, and pretend 2(8)^2^ gets different answers when simplified from 2(5+3)^2^ versus 2(8*1)^2^.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
‘If a+b equals b+a, why is 1/a+b different from 1/b+a?’
ab means a*b.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
says person who can’t back up anything they say about Terms with textbook references
“a X b is written ab and means a times b.”
Rub rub rub.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
You sneered about 1/ab five minutes ago.
Troll.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
That’s convention for notation, not a distinction between a*b and ab both being the product of a and b. ab means a*b.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
You can’t keep your own horseshit straight.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
This is you admitting there’s no difference. You insist they’re not the same. How?
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
Convention saying 1/a(b+c)^2^ is 1/(a(b+c)^2^) instead of (1/a)(b+c)^2^ doesn’t change how only (b+c) is squared.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
By all means, humiliate yourself by splitting that hair.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
They’re more than equal - a*b means ab. It’s an identity, which you’d understand, if you weren’t lying about being a teacher.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
none of the examples on this particular page feature the multiplication symbol ×
and why do you think that is?
“When a product involves a variable, it is customary to omit the symbol X of multiplication. Thus, 3 X n is written 3n and means three times n, and a X b is written ab and means a times b.”
Illiterate fraud.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
“a X b is written ab and means a times b.”
Rub rub rub.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
Personally I tend to bracket aggressively, because I’ve been repeatedly betrayed by compilers. One in particular applied the high priority of & (bitwise and) to the low-priority && (logical and), so if( 1 < 2 && 3 ) would always fail because 2 && 3 evaluates to 1.
That was the topic the first time I dealt with this dingus and their rules of maths!!! about a year ago. The post was several months old. They’ve never understood that some things are fundamental… and some things are made up. Some things are mutable. So even if their nonsense was widespread, we could say, that’s kinda stupid, we should do something else.
The dumbest argument I’ve ever suffered online was some dingdong convinced that “two times three” meant the quantity two, three times. Even though “two times” is right there, in the sentence. Even though “twice three” literally means “two times three.” Even though the song “Three Times A Lady” obviously does not mean the quantity three, ladyce. Not even that dipshit thought two times three-squared could be thirty-six.
- Comment on I dunno 1 day ago:
They’re grouped, being essentially the same operation, but inverted. Ditto for addition and subtraction. There’s not a convenient word that covers both directions, like how exponents / order are the same for positive and negative powers.
Convention is saying 1/ab is 1/(ab) instead of (1/a)b, while 1/a*b is indeed (1/a)b. The latter of which this troll would say is a syntax error, because juxtaposition after brackets is foreboden… despite modern textbook examples.
- Comment on I dunno 2 days ago:
your own textbook makes it clear that “doing brackets” means do what is inside the brackets first. Not what is outside the brackets.
Which this troll admits when sneering “They say you can [simplify first] when there is Addition or Subtraction inside the Brackets.”
Except when they sneer you must not do that, because there’s addition inside the brackets. 2(3*a+2*a)^2^ becomes 2(5*a)^2^, which gets a different answer, somehow. Or maybe it’s 2(3a+2a)^2^ becoming 2(5a)^2^ that’s different. One or the other is the SpEcIaL eXcEpTiOn to a rule they made up.
Weird how nobody else in the world has this problem. Almost like a convention that requires special cases is fucking stupid, and if people meant (2(n))^2^, they’d just write that.
Distributing 2 over a+b is not “doing brackets”; it is multiplication and comes afterwards.
Which this troll literally underlines when sneering about textbooks they don’t read: “A number next to anything in brackets means the contents of the brackets should be multiplied.”
Except when they insist distribution is totally different from multiplication… somehow.
- Comment on I dunno 3 days ago:
Yes… to make them one.
a*b and ab are both the product of a and b, and a product is one term. As explained by the textbook you chose.
a*b^2^ is ab^2^, even if b=(x+y).
- Comment on I dunno 3 days ago:
Multiplying two things makes them one term.
“When a product involves a variable, it is customary to omit the symbol X of multiplication. Thus, 3 X n is written 3n and means three times n, and a X b is written ab and means a times b.” Modern Algebra: Structure And Method, page 36. Immediately before the definition you’re now lying about.
a(b+c) is the same as a*(b+c), and neither a(b+c)^2^ nor a*(b+c)^2^ produce an a^2^ term. You made it up. You’re just full of shit.
- Comment on I dunno 4 days ago:
The result of a multiplication operation is called a product.
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.
- Comment on I dunno 4 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.
- Comment on I dunno 4 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.
- Comment on I dunno 4 days ago:
Every 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.
- Comment on Anon catches a glimpse of his own mortality 5 days ago:
Babushkas.
In ERA.
