https://zeta.one/viral-math/

I wrote a (very long) blog post about those viral math problems and am looking for feedback, especially from people who are not convinced that the problem is ambiguous.

It’s about a 30min read so thank you in advance if you really take the time to read it, but I think it’s worth it if you joined such discussions in the past, but I’m probably biased because I wrote it :)

  • ggppjj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    As far as I understand it, they’re given equal weight in the order of operations, it’s just whichever you hit first left to right.

    • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ah, but if you use the rules BODMSA (or PEDMSA) then you can follow the letter order strictly, ignoring the equal precedence left-to-right rule, and you still get the correct answer. Therefore clearly we should start teaching BODMSA in primary schools. Or perhaps BFEDMSA. (Brackets, named Functions, Exponentiation, Division, Multiplication, Subtraction, Addition). I’m sure that would remove all confusion and stop all arguments. … Or perhaps we need another letter to clarify whether implicit multiplication with a coefficient and no symbol is different to explicit multiplication… BFEIDMSA or BFEDIMSA. Shall we vote on it?

        • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Obviously more letters would make the mnemonic worse, not better. I was making a joke.

          As for the brackets ‘the rules around expanding brackets’ are only meaningful in the assumed context of our order of operations. For example, if we instead all agreed that addition should be before multiplication, then a×(b+c) would “expand” to a×b+c, because the addition is before multiplication anyway and the brackets do nothing.

          • I was making a joke.

            Fair enough, but my point still stands.

            if we instead all agreed that addition should be before multiplication

            …then you would STILL have to do multiplication first. You can’t change Maths by simply agreeing to change it - that’s like saying if we all agree that the Earth is flat then the Earth is flat. Similarly we can’t agree that 1+1=3 now. Maths is used to model the real world - you can’t “agree” to change physics. You can’t add 1 thing to 1 other thing and have 3 things now, no matter how much you might want to “agree” that there is 3, there’s only 2 things. Multiplying is a binary operation, and addition is unary, and you have to do binary operators before unary operators - that is a fact that no amount of “agreeing” can change. 2x3 is actually a contracted form of 2+2+2, which is why it has to be done before addition - you’re in fact exposing the hidden additions before you do the additions.

            the brackets do nothing

            The brackets, by definition, say what to do first. Regardless of any other order of operations rules, you always do brackets first - that is in fact their sole job. They indicate any exceptions to the rules that would apply otherwise. They perform no other function. If you’re going to no longer do brackets first then you would simply not use them at all anymore. And in fact we don’t - when there are redundant brackets, like in (2)(1+2), we simply leave them out, leaving 2(1+2).

            • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I believe you’re conflating the rules of maths with the notation we use to represent mathematical concepts. We can choose whatever notation we like to mean anything we like. There is absolutely nothing stopping us from choosing to interpret a+b×c as (a+b)×c rather than a+(b×c). We don’t even have to write it like that at all. We could write a,b,c×+. (And sometimes people do write it like that.) Notation is just a way to communicate. It represents the maths, but it is not itself the maths. Some notation is more convenient or more intuitive than others. × before + is a very convenient choice, because it easier to express mathematical truths clearly and concisely - but nevertheless, it is still just a choice.

              • I believe you’re conflating the rules of maths with the notation we use to represent mathematical concepts.

                You think a Maths teacher doesn’t know the difference?

                There is absolutely nothing stopping us from choosing to interpret a+b×c as (a+b)×c

                Yes there is - the underlying Maths. 2x3 is short for 2+2+2, which is therefore why you have to expand multiplications before doing additions. If you “chose” to interpret 2+3x4 (which we KNOW is equal to 14, because 3x4=3+3+3+3 by definition) as (2+3)x4, you would get 20, which is clearly wrong, since 20 isn’t equal to 14.

                We don’t even have to write it like that at all

                No that’s right, because it IS written differently in different languages, but regardless of how you write it, it doesn’t change that 2+3x4=14 - the underlying Maths doesn’t change regardless of how you decide to write it. Maths is literally universal.

                × before + is a very convenient choice

                It’s not a choice, it’s a consequence of the fact that x is shorthand for +. i.e. 2x3=2+2+2.

                it is still just a choice

                It is a consequence of the definitions of what each operator does. If x is a contraction of +, then we have to expand x before we do +. If it were the other way around then we’d have to do it the other way around. Anything which is a contraction of something else has to be expanded first.

                • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Hey man, if you want to resort to some weird appeal to authority argument despite having clear examples against what you are saying - go for it. You can choose to die on that hill if you want to.

    • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah 100% was not taught that. Follow the pemdas or fail the test. Division is after Multiply in pemdas.

      I put the equation into excel and get 9 which only makes sense in bodmas.

        • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The y(n+1) is same as yn + y if you removed the “6÷” part. It’s implied multiplication.

            • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Well I’m not seeing the difference here. Yn+y= yn+y = y(n+1) = y × (n +1) I think we agree with that.

              • 💡𝚂𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗆𝖺𝗇 𝙰𝗉𝗉𝗌📱@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Ok, that’s a start. In your simple example they are all equal, but they aren’t all the same.

                yn+y - 2 terms

                y(n+1) - 1 term

                y×(n +1) - 2 terms

                To see the difference, now precede it with a division, like in the original question…

                1÷yn+y=(1/yn)+y

                1÷y(n+1)=1/(yn+y)

                1÷y×(n +1)=(n +1)/y

                Note that in the last one, compared to the second one, the (n+1) is now in the numerator instead of in the denominator. Welcome to why having the (2+2) in the numerator gives the wrong answer.

                • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Good example wish we had better math format.
                  The granger issue is I thought multiple always happens first. But apparently it’s what’s left side first.

                  • multiple always happens first. But apparently it’s what’s left side first

                    Multiplication and division are equal precedence (and done left to right) if that’s what you’re talking about, but the issue is that a(b+c) isn’t “multiplication” at all, it’s a bracketed term with a coefficient which is therefore subject to The Distributive Law, and is solved as part of solving Brackets, which is always first. Multiplication refers literally to multiplication signs, of which there are none in the original question. A Term is a product, which is the result of a multiplication, not something which is to be multiplied.

                    If a=2 and b=3, then…

                    axb=2x3 - 2 terms

                    ab=6 - 1 term