In this case, you want a technical writer, not an English major.
Hey now ….. I married a tech writer (who bailed on engineering after calc 1). Many have met her at RR
Very true, it’d be the def of a straight line.
There ya go..ask her.
Yes
That's the error. If the slant line applied to the whole expression after, and not just the first term, the whole expression would be in a set of parantheses or square brackets.
Let's eat grandma
How about intermediate Ancient Greek written in boustrophedon style. One row right to left, the next left to right, then right to left again.
So says Deep Thought.
We had an old mechanical adding machine at the hardware store that worked somewhat the same way. If you bought eight $0.59 bulbs, and four $1.29 pots, I'd punch [50][9][8][x][1][20][9][4][x][=], then look up the sales tax on a paper card, say $0.62, and add it [60][2][+][=].
You quite obviously would have been a far better math teacher than my school has ever seen. Much to your benefit.
"The system of measure formerly known as English"?
Perhaps we could license this symbol.
Was not meant to say that I am an authority. Rather it was a response to:
And pointing out that in addition to the article saying that it was taught that way 100 years ago, it has been continuously taught that way up through a year or two ago and probably will be taught to students next year as well.
Actually, it was due to Western Union teletypes. Hence everything was uppercase.
You mean, it's not an alternative to the vinculum?
sundaymorninggreekblog.com
You're the one that called it "American measurement".
It was always "English". Also, the post seemed to show a disdain for other ways of doing things (the metric system). I'm "fluent" in both and use either one as needed. Please forgive me if I misunderstood.
I'm curious about what you mean by "wrong science" and "wrong history". Please don't reply about those in this thread because both science and history have become politicized in recent years. You may reply to me via PM if you wish as I don't want to politicize the thread, or close it for politics. That you knew the item quoted below suggests they taught you history better than you may think. Alternatively, you read a bit outside of classes:
I understand where they are coming from in that citation. However, like the rest of language, things have evolved. We have computer languages, listed earlier in the thread, that resolve the ambiguity using a left-to-right order. The citation cites Wolfram where they mention that they will evaluate from left-to-right the equation a/bc to be (a/b)*c rather than a/(b*c), which is a tacit acknowledgement of how things work now. As mentioned by others, over use of parenthesis to ensure clarity is better. Alternatively, although it is a pain to use, I'll use the equation editor in word and use the vinculum and other symbols as needed. Wolfram software can also use the formally written equation and their equation editor is easier to use.You mean, it's not an alternative to the vinculum?
EDIT: Rather than wait for an answer, I went searching and found a nice proof that the answer is NOT 16 but 1. Here's the main point:
"The expression to the right of the division sign must be processed as and simplified to an individual, inseparable term, because it is in the form of a Distributive Property expression. It has parentheses after all, so it must be dealt with before being divided into 8."
8 ÷ 2(2 + 2) = 1: Why PEMDAS Alone Is Not Enough
I thought I’d take a stab at explaining the current viral math problem.
Doesn't mention "vinculum", but the parentheses seem to call for the same treatment under the Distributive Property as if the slash were a vinculum.
Ambiguity results in interpretation and, just maybe, consensus among like-minded individuals. That consensus does not remove the ambiguity, nor does it render other interpretations wrong.
After perusing some of the comments in the blog I cited, there were actually 43 mentions of "vinculum". I think the author gives a competent defense of Rene's teacher's teaching, btw. One of the commenters made this point, which is how I see it:
Why did you think we didn’t know what ambiguity means, that you had to post a definition?
But where does “read aloud” show up in mathematical rules? It’s still got the ambiguity of the original formula unless you verbally define the parentheses.
None of those people have any more expertise in math than the rest of us. I get 36 from 60/5*(1+1*(1+1)), unless the spaces you placed around the division symbol have meaning. If so, please explain that to us.
Only among like minded individuals. For the rest of the non-programming language (people not trained to resolve ambiguity in exactly one manner), the equation is still ambiguous, something not everyone appears to accept.
You’re saying that even the ambiguity is ambiguous?
To my knowledge, only the USA still uses the system of weights and measures developed by the English. So, by default (abandonment) it is the "American" system. "(F)ormerly known as English" was just my being cheeky. (Which is harder to tell online.)
Liberia and Myanar also use the English system. Emojis help to tell that you are being cheeky. If you wanted to be correct, it would be the "American customary system" as there are differences from the imperial system, mostly in volume.
Assuming this is true, they simply didn't teach you anything. They may well have taught you the "right" history, science, and grammar, but by your own admission, you were reading rather than listening to the teacher(s)- I assume you had more than one teacher. They were all bad?
@Salty, @Half Fast , and I are hardly "like minded". Just look at our conversations here. I doubt we are "trained to resolve ambiguity in exactly one manner". We simply apply conventions that some people were taught incorrectly, simply haven't learned, or forgot. Our spelling is the result of "consensus" as well as how we use word ordering in the USA. Making things more complicated is the need for writing equations in a linear fashion on texts, tweets, or fora such as this where it is difficult to write equations in a non-linear fashion. Non-programmers do use calculators and spreadsheets, don’t they?
I don't think so. Please see what she was taught below.
As stated by others, multiplication and division are equivalent in precedence. Your citation doesn't apply to these comments.
I was referring to her conclusion, as taught, that the answer is "1". Btw, I didn't add any spaces anywhere. I pasted from the blog. In fact, I removed a space from the numerator that made it visually render too far removed from the rest of the fraction.
That sounds like something you would find in a Canadian farming community.
