Glitch in the matrix

Toes♀@ani.social to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone – 417 points –
573

You are viewing a single comment

I’m well familiar with math and the rules by which it works

i know you won't realise this because you never got past basic calculus, but this is a very funny statement to anybody that did

they know all the "math rules" guys. which ones? ALL of them

but okay these rules: where do they come from, then?

Fortunately, the rules necessary to resolve the equation in this post are extremely elementary, so none of what you're referencing has any bearing whatever.

There are exactly three things to consider in here to determine priority: parentheses, multiplication/division, and addition. The addition happens first due to the parentheses, and the remaining is evaluated left-to-right. The only correct answer here is 16.

All your deflection from your embarrassment at misreading a simple equation doesn't detract from this.

Fortunately, the rules necessary to resolve the equation in this post are extremely elementary, so none of what you’re referencing has any bearing whatever.

this would be like trying to tell a chemical engineer they didn't know what they were doing based on your understanding of the atom as a ball of protons with electrons wooshing round it like they were moons

very cute

unfortunately, if you give the expression 1 / 2x to anybody who knows what they're doing they'll interpret it as 1 / (2x) because it would be absurd not to

for reference, that's why the calculator works like this. because it's a tool designed primarily for people who actually know what they're doing with numbers, so it works how they expect it to work

And there you've proven exactly what I've been saying all along. 2x works the way it does because there's a variable involved, and natural reading of that treats it as a single entity. There are no variables in the equation in the post, there are only definite numbers, parentheses, and simple mathematical operations. 8/2(2+2) is nothing more than 8/2×(2+2). There is nothing special about 2(..., this is not the equivalent of 2x.

a natural reading of 2(2+2) treats it as the same

you're straight up just spouting contradictory nonsense now because you've realised your stance doesn't make any sense, and i am very much here for it

No, what I'm explaining to you is the facts behind what every calculator with any modicum of computing power will tell you, namely that 2(2+2) is identical to 2×(2+2).

ah yes it's the computing power that's at issue here

Yeah, kind of. The crappier calculator is the one generating the incorrect answer. Any calculator with any real level of oomph behind it can parse this correctly to get the correct answer, 16.

the good calculator is the one showing you adverts

~ local galaxy brain

The good calculator is the one using the processing power of the phone to handle the programming necessary to correctly interpret the order of operations and arrive at the correct answer, whereas the bad calculator - despite having no ads - is a cheap piece of trash unable to contain the necessary computational logic to arrive at the correct answer.

2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
3 more...
3 more...

2x works the way it does because there’s a variable involved, and natural reading of that treats it as a single entity

Just like 2(2+2) is also a single Term.

no variables in the equation in the post, there are only definite numbers

Pronumerals literally stand in for numerals, and work exactly the same way. There is nothing special about choosing a pronumeral to represent a numeral.

8/2(2+2) is nothing more than 8/2×(2+2).

They're completely different actually. 2(2+2) is a single term in the denominator, (2+2) - which you separated from the 2 with an x - is a now 3rd term which is now in the numerator, having been separated from the 2 which is in the denominator.

There is nothing special about 2(…, this is not the equivalent of 2x

So what's it equal to when x=2+2?

3 more...
3 more...
3 more...
3 more...