• Pharmacokinetics
    link
    471 year ago

    People keep debating over this stuff. I have a simpler solution. Math is not real.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      101 year ago

      The only real answer lmao. People really out here thinking the funny symbols on the paper follow absolute laws. Crazy.

    • @AdrianTheFrog
      link
      English
      71 year ago

      My mom’s a mathematician, she got annoyed when I said that the order of operations is just arbitrary rules made up by people a couple thousand years ago

      • @tamal3
        link
        21 year ago

        It’s organized so that more powerful operations get precedence, which seems natural.

        Set aside intentionally confusing expressions. The basic idea of the Order of Operations holds water even without ever formally learning the rules.

        If an addition result comes first and gets exponentiated, the changes from the addition are exaggerated. It makes addition more powerful than it should be. The big stuff should happen first, then the more granular operations. Of course, there are specific cases where we need to reorder, or add clarity, which is why human decisions about groupings are at the top.

        • @Mango
          link
          21 year ago

          Yeah, but that’s why I like to buff my base attack before I invest in multipliers and armor penetration!

        • The big stuff should happen first, then the more granular operations

          The “big stuff” is stuff that is defined in terms of something else. i.e. exponents are shorthand for repeated multiplication… and multiplication is shorthand for repeated addition, hence they have to be done in that order or you get wrong answers.

          • @AdrianTheFrog
            link
            English
            1
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            “Wrong answers” only according to our current order of operations, math still works if you, for example, make additions come first (as long as you’re consistent about it).

            OFC it is a convention and to change it you would have to change all expressions ever written all at the same time, to avoid confusion between competing standards. I’m not arguing that it should be changed, only that there is no ‘high truth’ behind it.

            • “Wrong answers” only according to our current order of operations

              No, according to arithmetic.

              math still works if you, for example, make additions come first

              No, it doesn’t - order of operations proof. The only way it could work with addition first is if we swapped the definitions of addition and multiplication around… but then we still have the same order of operations, all we’ve done is swapped around what we call addition and multiplication!

              there is no ‘high truth’ behind it.

              There is when it comes to order of operations.

              • @AdrianTheFrog
                link
                English
                19 months ago

                Let’s assume for a minute addition comes first. We know 2+3 is 5, and 5x4 is the same as 5+5+5+5=20. What is the issue with that?

                • 5+5+5+5=20. What is the issue with that?

                  That it’s wrong. If I have 1 2 litre bottle of milk, and 4 3 litre bottles of milk - i.e. 2+3x4 - how many litres of milk do I have? Without even doing the arithmetic, just count it up and tell me how many litres there is.

                  • @AdrianTheFrog
                    link
                    English
                    19 months ago

                    If we change how equations are parsed so addition comes before multiplication, 2+3x4 is not the equation required to solve that problem. 2+(3x4) is the equation needed. You can’t change how equations work and then expect all equations to work the same after the change.

                    If your argument is that this will add parentheses where we didn’t need them before, that’s valid and its the reason we do it this way in the first place. But that doesn’t mean there is anything fundamentally wrong with having a different system of writing equations in which operations are executed in a different order.

                    Our whole system of writing equations is just a convention, and yes, it is a good and easy to understand and use way of writing math. But there is no fundamental truth behind it, only that it is simpler for the majority of use cases.

      • My mom’s a mathematician, she got annoyed when I said that the order of operations is just arbitrary rules made up by people a couple thousand years ago

        I’m not surprised. Here’s the proof of the order of operations rules. Also, the equals sign wasn’t invented until the 16th century, so only 500 years old at most (the earliest references to order of operations are over 400 years ago).

        • @AdrianTheFrog
          link
          English
          19 months ago

          That proof for the order of operations sure seems to rely a lot on our current order of operations…

          • That proof for the order of operations sure seems to rely a lot on our current order of operations

            Doesn’t use order of operations at all. It only uses the definitions of the operators. i.e. 3x4=3+3+3+3 by definition. i.e. nothing to do with order of operations.

            If I have 1 2l bottle of milk, and 4 3l bottles of milk, how many litres of milk do I have? It can be solved by simply adding them up - again, nothing to do with order of operations here, just simple addition. Now, write it out as a mathematical expression which uses multiplication, and tell me which order of operations gets you the right answer. Voila! Welcome to how we worked out what the order of operations rules had to be.

            • @AdrianTheFrog
              link
              English
              19 months ago

              2+(4x3) gives the right answer, with addition coming before multiplication

              • 2+(4x3) gives the right answer, with addition coming before multiplication

                If we rewrote all of Maths so that addition came before multiplication, then no, 2+3x4 would no longer mean what it does now (because + and x would have to mean something different to what they do now in order for the order to be swapped). The order of operations rules come directly from the definitions. You can’t just say “we’ll do addition first” without having defined what addition is now, nor multiplication. In a world where addition comes before multiplication, that means multiplication is no longer shorthand for addition (because that’s the very thing which means we have to do multiplication before addition, so it can’t be true anymore if now we’re doing addition first).

                Let’s take an imaginary scenario where we now use x for add, and + for multiply. That would indeed mean that + has to be done before x, but note that + now means multiply. That means your “addition first” 2+(3x4) is what we currently mean by 2x(3+4) which is 14. Now take away the brackets (since I don’t use brackets when adding up the milk! Just 2+3x4). Your addition-first 2+3x4 is equivalent in our multiplication-first world to 2x3+4 which equals 10 - the wrong answer! So now you’ve created a world where we have to add brackets to things just to get the right answer! Why would you even want to do that when it works the way it is? The whole point to having order of operations rules is to not have to add brackets!

    • Flying Squid
      link
      31 year ago

      I’m with you. Has anyone ever actually seen a math? Can you buy a math at the math store? Are there bespoke math craftspeople?

      No.

      I rest my case.