A fake Facebook event disguised as a math problem has been one of its top posts for 6 months
A nearly year-old Facebook event for a "simple maths competition" has been one of the most viral posts on the platform for six months.
You're viewing part of a thread.
What fundamental property of the universe says that
6 + 4 / 2 is 8 instead of 5?
Nothing. And that's why people don't write equations like that: You either see
undefined
4
6 + ---
2
or
undefined
6 + 4 ------- 2
If you wrote 6 + 4 / 2 in a paper you'd get reviewers complaining that it's ambiguous, if you want it to be on one line write (6+4) / 2 or 6 + (4/2) or 6 + ⁴⁄₂ or even ½(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.
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.
But +, -, *, and / are all binary operators.
As far as I know, the only reason multiplication and division come first is that we've all agreed to it. But it can't be derived in a vacuum as that other dude contends it should be.
But +, -, *, and / are all binary operators?
No, only multiply and divide are. 2+3 is really +2+3, but we don't write the first plus usually (on the other hand we do always write the minus if it starts with one).
As far as I know, the only reason multiplication and division come first is that we’ve all agreed to it.
No, they come first because you get wrong answers if you don't do them first. e.g. 2+3x4=14, not 20. All the rules of Maths exist to make sure you get correct answers. Multiplication is defined as repeated addition - 3x4=3+3+3+3 - hence wrong answers if you do the addition first (just changed the multiplicand, and hence the answer). Ditto for exponents, which are defined as repeated multiplication, a2=(axa). Order of operations is the process of reducing everything down to adds and subtracts on a number line. 32=3x3=3+3+3
Your example still doesn't give a reason why 2 + 3 * 4 is 2 + 3 + 3 + 3 +3 instead of 2 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 2 + 3 other than that we all agree to it.
Very confidently getting basic facts wrong doesn’t inspire confidence in the rest of your comments.
...says person quoting Wikipedia and NOT a Maths textbook! 😂
Your example still doesn’t give a reason why 2 + 3 * 4 is 2 + 3 + 3 + 3 +3
Yes it does., need to work on your comprehension..
Multiplication is defined as repeated addition - 3x4=3+3+3+3
other than that we all agree to it
You can disagree as much as you want and 3x4 will still be defined as 3+3+3+3. It's been that way ever since Multiplication was invented.
The arithmetic operations, addition + , subtraction − , multiplication × , and division ÷
That better? Or you can find one you like all by yourself: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=binary+operator&ko=-1&ia=web
Yes it does., need to work on your comprehension..
And you can shove the condescension up your ass until you understand the difference between unary and binary operators.
But to original point. I'm not disagreeing with anything and you're proving my point for me. There is no fundamental law of the universe that says multiplication comes first. It's defined by man and agreed to. If we encounter aliens someday, the area of their triangles are still going to be half the width times the height, the ratios of their circles circumference to diameter are still going to be pi, regardless of how they represent those values. But they could very well prioritize addition and subtraction over multiplication and division.
That better?
Is it a Maths textbook?
Or you can find one you like all by yourself
I already have dozens of Maths textbooks thanks.
And you can shove the condescension up your ass until you understand the difference between unary and binary operators
It's not me who doesn't understand the difference.
you’re proving my point for me.
Still need to work on your comprehension then. I did nothing of the sort.
There is no fundamental law of the universe that says multiplication comes first.
Yes there is. The fact that it's defined as repeated addition. You don't do it first, you get wrong answers.
It’s defined by man and agreed to
It's been defined and man has no choice but to agree with the consequences of the definition, or you get wrong answers.
But they could very well prioritize addition and subtraction over multiplication and division
No they couldn't. It gives wrong answers.
Actually, it is. Written by a PhD and used in a college course. It just happens to be distributed for free because Canada is cool like that.
The LibreTexts libraries are Powered by NICE CXone Expert and are supported by the Department of Education Open Textbook Pilot Project, the UC Davis Office of the Provost, the UC Davis Library, the California State University Affordable Learning Solutions Program
May want to work on your own reading comprehension.
It's not me who doesn't understand the difference.
The facts disagree.
You can keep saying defined all you want, it doesn't change the underlying issue that it's defined by man. In the absence of all your books (which you clearly don't understand anyway based on our discussion of unary vs binary) order of operations only exists because we all agree to it.
Actually, it is. Written by a PhD and used in a college course.
Yeah there's an issue with them having forgotten the basic rules, since they don't actually teach them (except in a remedial way). Why do you think I keep trying to bring you back to actual Maths textbooks?
May want to work on your own reading comprehension.
Nope. It's still not a textbook. Sounds more like a higher education version of Wikipedia.
The facts disagree
With you, yes.
it doesn’t change the underlying issue that it’s defined by man.
The notation is, the rules aren't.
In the absence of all your books (which you clearly don’t understand anyway based on our discussion of unary vs binary)
Says person who doesn't understand the difference between unary and binary. Apparently EVERYTHING is binary according to you (and your website). 😂
order of operations only exists because we all agree to it
It exists whether we agree with it or not. Don't obey it, get wrong answers.
Nope. It's still not a textbook. Sounds more like a higher education version of Wikipedia.
It is though. Here's a link to buy a printed copy: https://libretexts.org/bookstore/order?math-7309
You keep mentioning textbooks but haven't actually shown any that support you. I have. I'll trust the PhD teaching a university course on the subject over the nobody on the internet who just keeps saying "trust me bro" and then being condescending while also being embarrassingly wrong.
And because I can't help it, I'll also trust Wolfram over you: Examples of binary operation on A from A×A to A include addition (+), subtraction (-), multiplication (×) and division (÷). Here, you can buy a copy of this too: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1420072218/weisstein-20
Says person who doesn't understand the difference between unary and binary.
Talking about yourself in the third person is weird. Even your nonsense about a silent "+" is really just leaving off the leading 0 in the equation 0+2. Because addition is a binary operator.
Apparently EVERYTHING is binary according to you (and your website). 😂
Only the ones that operate on two inputs. Some examples of unary operators are factorial, absolute value, and trig functions. The laughing face when you make a fool of yourself isn't really as effective as you think it is.
But we're getting off topic again. I can't keep trying to explain the same thing to you, so I would say this has been fun, but it's been more like talking to an unusually obnoxious brick wall. Next time you want to engage with someone try being less of a prick, or at least less wrong. You're not nearly as smart as you seem to think you are.