this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
421 points (100.0% liked)

196

16739 readers
3295 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Limitless_screaming@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (5 children)

My Casio calculators get this wrong, even the newer ones. BTW the correct answer is 16, right?

[–] cerement 53 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • 16 is the right answer if you use PEMDAS only: (8 ÷ 2) × (2 + 2)
  • 1 is the right answer if you use implicit/explicit with PEMDAS: 8 ÷ (2 × (2 + 2))
  • both are correct answers (as in if you don’t put in extra parentheses to reduce ambiguity, you should expect expect either answer)
  • this is also one of the reasons why postfix and prefix notations have an advantage over infix notation
    • postfix (HP, RPN, Forth): 2 2 + 8 2 ÷ × .
    • prefix (Lisp): (× (÷ 8 2) (+ 2 2))
[–] brian@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

prefix notation doesn't need parentheses either though, at least in this case. lisp uses them for readability and to get multiple arity operators. infix doesn't have any ambiguity either if you parenthesize all operations like that.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

infix doesn’t have any ambiguity either if you parenthesize all operations like that

There isn't any ambiguity even if you don't.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

16 is the right answer if you use PEMDAS only: (8 ÷ 2) × (2 + 2)

You added brackets and changed the answer. 2(2+2) is a single term, and if you break it up then you change the answer (because now the (2+2) is in the numerator instead of in the denominator).

1 is the right answer

The only right answer

both are correct answers

Nope, 1 is the only correct answer.

this is also one of the reasons why postfix and prefix notations have an advantage over infix notation

Except they don't. This isn't a notation problem, it's a people don't remember the rules of Maths problem.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Replace (2+2) with x.

8 / 2x = 4 / x = 4 / (2+2) = 1

PEMDAS is a learning tool, it's not perfect and is predated by implicit multiplication.

[–] KoalaUnknown@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)

Yes

8 / 2 (2+2)

8 / 2 (4)

4 (4)

16

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

No

8 / 2 (2+2)

8 / 2 (4)

8 / 8

1

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No. Order of operations is left to right, not right to left. 1 is wrong.

[–] 50MYT@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Pemdas.

Multiplication comes before division.

1 is the correct answer.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's wrong. Multiplication and division have equal precedence, same as addition and subtraction. You do them left to right. PEMDAS could be rewritten like PE(MD)(AS). After parentheses and exponents, it"s Multiplication and division together, then addition and subtraction together. They also teach BODMAS some places, which is "brackets, order, division and multiplication, addition and subtraction" Despite reversing the division and multiplication, it doesn't change the order of operations. They have the same priority, so they are just done left to right. PEMDAS and BODMAS are the different shorthand for the same order of operations.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They were right but for the wrong reason. Implied multiplication–that is, a(b) or ab–often comes before explicit multiplication and division. Apparently it's up to the person writing the equation, so the meme is intentionally and explicitly ambiguous

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

They're still wrong, in my humble opinion. I'm aware of this notion, and I've even had people share a snip from some book that states this as fact. However, this is not standardized and without the convention being widely understood and recognized as the standard in the world of mathematics (which generally doesn't use the symbol (÷) at all at post-algebra levels), there is no reason to treat it as such just because a few people assert it is should be.

It doesn't make sense at all to me that implied multiplication would be treated any differently, let alone at a higher priority, than explicit multiplication. They're both the same operation, just with different notations, the former of which we use as shorthand.

There are obviously examples that show the use of the division symbol without parentheses sometimes leads to misunderstandings like this. It's why that symbol is not used by real mathematicians at all. It is just abundantly more clear what you're saying if you use the fraction bar notation (the line with numerator on top and denominator on bottom). But the rules as actually written, when followed, only reach one conclusion for this problem and others like it. x÷y(z) is the SAME as x÷y*z. There's no mathematical or logical reason to treat it differently. If you meant for the implicit multiplication to have priority it should be in parentheses, x÷(y(z)), or written with the fraction bar notation.

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Implicit multiplication being before regular multiplication/division is so we can write 2y/3x instead of (2y)/(3x). Without priority, 2y/3x becomes (2y÷3)•x.

Coefficients are widely used enough that mathematicians don't want to write parentheses around every single one. So implicit multiplication gets priority.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think one could argue a coefficient on an unknown variable, like 2y, should take higher priority simply because it cannot be any further resolved or simplified. That is not the case with, say, 2(3+1). Although that does still leave you with potential ambiguity with division/multiplication, such has 1/7y. Is the coefficient 7, or is it 1/7? i.e. Is that 1/(7y)? Or (1/7)y? Either way, if that's not the the standard understood by everyone, then it is a non-standard, inconsistent rule. And as demonstrated, if you do use that rule, it needs to be more clearly defined. That is the source of this "ambiguity". If you don't include it, the order of operations rules, as written, are clear.

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree it needs to be more clearly defined, but one of the reasons it wasn't clearly defined was because mathematicians thought it was so universal it didn't need defining, like how parentheses work to begin with.

Casio tried not doing umplicit multiplication after some american teachers complained, then went back to doing it after everyone else complained. Implicit multiplication is the standard.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

2y, should take higher priority simply because it cannot be any further resolved or simplified

Bingo!

That is not the case with, say, 2(3+1)

It's the same thing, where y=3+1.

1/7y. Is the coefficient 7, or is it 1/7? i.e. Is that 1/(7y)

Yes, it's 1/(7y) as per the definition of Terms.

Either way, if that’s not the the standard understood by everyone

It's the standard in literally every Maths textbook.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why the hell are you commenting on my 4 month old comments trying to argue. Fuck off.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago

Actually I'm educating and hoping people will stop arguing about it. You can take it on board or not. You actually nearly had it.

Also, your comments will show up in search results for all eternity unless you delete them.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's an argument to be made that implicit multiplication comes before division, resulting in the answer 1, but all multiplication? That's wrong, full-stop. You calculate (explicit) multiplication and division in one step, left to right. Reason being that division is technically just multiplying by the reciprocal.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago

1 is the correct answer, but it's because Brackets comes before Division - there is no Multiplication in this problem.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago

Order of operations is left to right

Order of operations is BEDMAS, THEN left to right within each operator.

1 is wrong

1 is the only correct answer.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

a(b) is a×b. Step 2 could be rewritten as 8 / 2 × 4. Working left to right, step 3 becomes 4 × 4.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

No, because implicit multiplication binds more tightly than explicit. a/b(c) becomes a/(b×(c))

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Most maths textbooks written by mathematicians.

I don't mean when they're explaining "here's how the order of operations works". I mean in the basic way that they write more advanced problems and the answers they give for them.

This video, and the prequel to it linked in the description, go into some detail showing who uses what convention and why.

[–] Nihilore@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Interestingly I’ve wondered if this is regional, as a fellow Aussie I learned the same as you but it seems in other places they learn the other way

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 6 points 1 year ago

FWIW I went to school in Asia, using an internationally-focused curriculum, rather than going through the Australian curriculum here in Aus.

The video I linked includes some discussion with a calculator manufacturer who apparently is under the impression that teachers in North America are asking for strict BIDMAS, so the calculator manufacturer actually switched their calculators to doing that. Until they then got blowback from the rest of the world's teachers, so they switched back to BIDMAS with juxtaposition being prioritised over division. The video also presents the case that outside of teachers—among actual maths and physics academics—prioritising juxtaposition is always preferred, even in North America.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Huh, I'll be darned. I'm not as much of a math nerd as I thought

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's exactly where the calculators in the op differ. For more examples, Casio calculators do implicit multiplication first, while ti's treat it the same as explicit multiplication and division. I think that the latter is more predictable personally, but really you just need to know your calculator.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago

Casio calculators do implicit multiplication first

Actually they follow the actual rules of Maths - Terms and The Distributive Law.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

the correct answer is 16, right?

No, the correct answer is 1.

[–] Th0rgue@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Depends on the system you use. Most common system worldwide and in the academic circles (the oldest of the two) has 1 as the answer.

[–] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Depends on the system you use

There are no other systems - only people who are following the actual rules of Maths and those who aren't. And yes, 1 is the correct answer

load more comments (1 replies)