Glitch in the matrix
Glitch in the matrix
You're viewing a single thread.
574 comments
-
Ah damn it. It took me ages to find a calculator app that fits my needs..... And now I find out it works like the one on the right.
-
... the one on the right is correct.... that's a jank ass calculator on the left that doesn't know how to do order of operations 8/2×(2+2) 8/2x4 4x4 16
-
There isn't a multiplication symbol though. By your logic something like
8÷2xwould mean(8÷2)*xbecause order of operationsOr if you read
8÷2√xas(8÷2)*√xJust notate
8÷2(2+2)as8÷2x; x=(2+2)and you get it, you can substitute any complete expression with a variable in an equation and the logic stays the same.-
You know sometimes both are correct.
-
You know sometimes both are correct
Nope. That's what the order of operations rules take care of.
-
-
-
the one on the right is correct
No, it isn't.
8/2×(2+2)
...isn't the same thing as 8/2(2+2). You separated the term in the denominator, leading the (2+2) to get flipped into the numerator, hence wrong answer.
-
That would be 8/(2x(2+2)) if we were keeping it all in the denominator. Multiplication happens in the numerator if there are no parenthesis to distinguish it. If thr equation was written like this:
8
2x(2+2)
Then you would also be correct, but I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis.
-
That would be 8/(2x(2+2)) if we were keeping it all in the denominator
(2x(2+2)) is the same thing as 2(2+2)
I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis
Which means you disagree with how Maths textbooks teach how to do this (see previous link).
-
-
-
-
Hiper Calc is the calculator app that I use. It's very good. When I ran this equation, it actually notified me how the operands should be grouped (weak or strong) and provided two answers. Honestly the whole issue can be avoided if you use more parentheses
-
the whole issue can be avoided
...by following all the order of operations rules
-
-
HP Prime, king of all. Or if you prefer open source NumWorks.
-
574 comments