|
This makes me sad.
288 and (1/2)*x.
This is literally like 4th grade stuff.
|
Okay, it's not "bad" notation, but it's definitely non-standard. My read is that it's either one of these or the other.
1. A mistake while trying to write 48/(2(9+3))
2. A trick question designed to make people incorrectly think 1
I went with 1. I think the answer is 2. :-)
|
On April 08 2011 11:21 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:18 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:17 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:14 space_yes wrote:![[image loading]](http://i55.tinypic.com/332w3sn.jpg) Not sure what to tell you. The poll only tricks people b/c the fraction is written on one line instead of being formatted so you have to use order of operations.. Writing it on one line is the trick. It's bad notation and confusing at first glance. That book writes it on two lines, which is the proper way to do it. I am now going to assume you don't know what ambiguity is. "Confusing" is not ambiguity if the cause of the confusion is ignorance (or even just not reading correctly). If your brain doesn't read it correctly immediately then it's poorly written. Not much else to say there. I'm sorry that everything in life isn't handed to you on a silver platter. Unfortunately, (2) + (2) is still equal to 4, and is completely unambiguous, no matter what you want to say. "Poorly written" sounds like a euphemism for "yeah, I just don't like it".
I'm sorry if you think that math is completely objective and that there aren't good and bad ways to do things. You must also think that writing a bunch of code on one line is fine because you don't get compiler errors.
|
On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is.
If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong.
The order of operations is a set of rules with definite right and wrong ways, there is no interpreting, there is only following or not following those rules.
|
The poll questions test whether you implemented the logic of order of operations correctly. It's not ambiguous at all; it only seems that way if you don't know you need to use order of operations or you don't know how. With order of operations there is no possible way to interpret the question except as .5x. It's ok to be wrong guys ^_^
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
I can see why people get it wrong by using PEMDAS.
If you multiply before dividing, you will get it wrong.
|
On April 08 2011 11:17 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:16 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:14 space_yes wrote:Not sure what to tell you. The poll only tricks people b/c the fraction is written on one line instead of being formatted so you have to use order of operations.. Writing it on one line is the trick. It's bad notation and confusing at first glance. That book writes it on two lines, which is the proper way to do it. I am now going to assume you don't know what ambiguity is. "Confusing" is not ambiguity if the cause of the confusion is ignorance (or even just not reading correctly). Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. The definition of ambiguity you used is a vague, broad definition that only serves to include pretty much anything you want. I interpret 2+2 to equal 5. To hell with it, it's an ambiguous question. 2(9+3) isn't a single term. Even if it is, that would mean 288 is simply wrong, not that the question itself is ambiguous.
What? So you're just disregarding my definition of ambiguity, which is the definition wikipedia gives by the way? I didn't say 288 was wrong, the definition says nothing about whether the information that is being interpreted leads to a correct answer or not, it simply says that if it can be interpreted in more than one way it is ambiguous, really it's very simple.
288 is the correct answer, but the question is ambiguous.
And you're example is completely off base and shows you don't understand the definition of ambiguous. First of all 2+2 = 5 isn't a question, it is a mathematical statement which is clearly incorrect.
|
On April 08 2011 11:24 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:21 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:18 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:17 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:14 space_yes wrote:Not sure what to tell you. The poll only tricks people b/c the fraction is written on one line instead of being formatted so you have to use order of operations.. Writing it on one line is the trick. It's bad notation and confusing at first glance. That book writes it on two lines, which is the proper way to do it. I am now going to assume you don't know what ambiguity is. "Confusing" is not ambiguity if the cause of the confusion is ignorance (or even just not reading correctly). If your brain doesn't read it correctly immediately then it's poorly written. Not much else to say there. I'm sorry that everything in life isn't handed to you on a silver platter. Unfortunately, (2) + (2) is still equal to 4, and is completely unambiguous, no matter what you want to say. "Poorly written" sounds like a euphemism for "yeah, I just don't like it". I'm sorry if you think that math is completely objective and that there aren't good and bad ways to do things. You must also think that writing a bunch of code on one line is fine because you don't get compiler errors.
Find a dictionary, please. "Good" and "Bad" ways of doing things doesn't make things ambiguous.
|
On April 08 2011 11:25 phantaxx wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong.
There's nothing in 2+4*6 that makes you interpret it as (2+4)*6. You can't say the same about the problem in the OP.
|
ok, question
48
-------- = x
2(9+3)
48 = x(2(9+3))
48 = x(2(12))
48 = x(24)
x = 2
Why is this mathematically incorrect?edit - doh
|
On April 08 2011 11:25 space_yes wrote:
The poll questions test whether you implemented the logic of order of operations correctly. It's not ambiguous at all; it only seems that way if you don't know you need to use order of operations or you don't know how. With order of operations there is no possible way to interpret the question except as .5x. It's ok to be wrong guys ^_^
LMAO. I love how everyone you're arguing against got the problem right.
|
On April 08 2011 11:27 Mailing wrote:
ok, question
48
-------- = x
2(9+3)
48 = x(2(9+3))
48 = x(2(12))
48 = x(24)
x = 2
Why is this mathematically incorrect?
It's not, but that's not what the OP's problem is asking.
|
On April 08 2011 11:26 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:25 phantaxx wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong. There's nothing in 2+4*6 that makes you interpret it as (2+4)*6. You can't say the same about the problem in the OP.
His lack of knowledge made him interpret it that way. Same as in the OP. It's not ambiguous, but it is less-than-optimal notation (it can be both you know).
|
On April 08 2011 11:25 MadVillain wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:17 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:14 space_yes wrote:Not sure what to tell you. The poll only tricks people b/c the fraction is written on one line instead of being formatted so you have to use order of operations.. Writing it on one line is the trick. It's bad notation and confusing at first glance. That book writes it on two lines, which is the proper way to do it. I am now going to assume you don't know what ambiguity is. "Confusing" is not ambiguity if the cause of the confusion is ignorance (or even just not reading correctly). On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. The definition of ambiguity you used is a vague, broad definition that only serves to include pretty much anything you want. I interpret 2+2 to equal 5. To hell with it, it's an ambiguous question. 2(9+3) isn't a single term. Even if it is, that would mean 288 is simply wrong, not that the question itself is ambiguous. What? So you're just disregarding my definition of ambiguity, which is the definition wikipedia gives by the way? I didn't say 288 was wrong, the definition says nothing about whether the information that is being interpreted leads to a correct answer or not, it simply says that if it can be interpreted in more than one way it is ambiguous, really it's very simple. 288 is the correct answer, but the question is ambiguous. And you're example is completely off base and shows you don't understand the definition of ambiguous. First of all 2+2 = 5 isn't a question, it is a mathematical statement which is clearly incorrect.
I use ambiguous wording myself. The "question" I was referring to (implying, really) was "what is 2+2?" Anybody can interpret anything to mean anything they want, and the wikipedia definition really doesn't give justice to context.
To me, the question in the OP is clearly 288. Simply saying that would completely crush your argument, but I can't live with that because nobody would respect that as a proper response 
I definitely understand the definition of ambiguity. The example I posted was to prove how terrible the definition was in the first place.
|
On April 08 2011 11:24 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:21 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:18 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:17 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:14 space_yes wrote:Not sure what to tell you. The poll only tricks people b/c the fraction is written on one line instead of being formatted so you have to use order of operations.. Writing it on one line is the trick. It's bad notation and confusing at first glance. That book writes it on two lines, which is the proper way to do it. I am now going to assume you don't know what ambiguity is. "Confusing" is not ambiguity if the cause of the confusion is ignorance (or even just not reading correctly). If your brain doesn't read it correctly immediately then it's poorly written. Not much else to say there. I'm sorry that everything in life isn't handed to you on a silver platter. Unfortunately, (2) + (2) is still equal to 4, and is completely unambiguous, no matter what you want to say. "Poorly written" sounds like a euphemism for "yeah, I just don't like it". I'm sorry if you think that math is completely objective and that there aren't good and bad ways to do things. You must also think that writing a bunch of code on one line is fine because you don't get compiler errors.
Sure there is good and bad coding style. There is also good and bad mathematical presentation. Neither will actually cause you to get the wrong answer unless you made an incorrect computation. If on your data structures exam, they give you code for priority queue on one line and then ask you a question about the priority queue if you understand the code you should still get the question correctly. Putting it all on one line makes it harder to understand but it doesn't change the internal logic of the code, question, or answer.
|
On April 08 2011 11:25 phantaxx wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong.
But under no mathematical setting do people ever interpret 2+4*6 to be (2+4) * 6, that is a silly facetious example.
Do you actually think that people in a university setting interpret 1/xy as (1/x)*y ? No, they don't. The ambiguity arises from the fact that 2(9+3) is commonly viewed as a single unit, just as xy is.
|
On April 08 2011 11:28 Swede wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:26 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:25 phantaxx wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong. There's nothing in 2+4*6 that makes you interpret it as (2+4)*6. You can't say the same about the problem in the OP. His lack of knowledge made him interpret it that way. Same as in the OP. It's not ambiguous, but it is less-than-optimal notation (it can be both you know).
2+4*6 is fine notation. Using extra parentheses for clarity is only necessary when division is involved.
|
On April 08 2011 11:29 MadVillain wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:25 phantaxx wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:06 jtan wrote:
There also seems to be some different use of the word ambigous.
The expression 1/x*y is unambigious in the strict computer-sience sense, but like I said, it's ambigious in the sense that a lot of people interpret it differently, you can't really argue against that. Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong. But under no mathematical setting do people ever interpret 2+4*6 to be (2+4) * 6, that is a silly facetious example. Do you actually think that people in a university setting interpret 1/xy as (1/x)*y ? No, they don't. The ambiguity arises from the fact that 2(9+3) is commonly viewed as a single unit, just as xy is.
Yes we do interpret 1/xy as (1/x)*y b/c of order of operations.
|
On April 08 2011 11:30 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 11:28 Swede wrote:On April 08 2011 11:26 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:25 phantaxx wrote:On April 08 2011 11:16 MadVillain wrote:On April 08 2011 11:13 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:10 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 11:08 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 11:07 Zeke50100 wrote:
[quote]
Lack of knowledge does not mean ambiguous. Are you really trying to argue that hundreds of people don't know order of operations, or am I missing something? Yes. Hundreds of people (those who have bothered to reply, anyway, which is indicative of response bias in the first place) just don't know their stuff. You can't be serious. I just refuse to believe you're serious. You really can't see how the problem is a trick without assuming complete lack of order of operations knowledge? What the fuck? I never said a complete lack of knowledge. You might want to look up what knowledge means. Somebody's ignorance of the fact that you do not, indeed, multiply 2 by 9+3 before proceeding with the rest of the simplification is a lack of knowledge. But that is not why people got the question wrong. They got it wrong because they assumed that 2(9+3) is being used as a single unit which it often is in a mathematical setting. Nobody was lacking the knowledge of order of operations as you're claiming. Face it, by definition the question is ambiguous. I'll post the definition again in case you missed it: "Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way..." People "interpreted" the 2(9+3) to be one unit it can also be interpreted as not being one unit. There are two ways to interpret it. Two is more that one. It is ambiguous. Clear? I don't think you have the "knowledge" of what ambiguity is. If I interpret 2+4 * 6 as (2+4) * 6, that doesn't mean it is ambiguous. I would just be wrong. There's nothing in 2+4*6 that makes you interpret it as (2+4)*6. You can't say the same about the problem in the OP. His lack of knowledge made him interpret it that way. Same as in the OP. It's not ambiguous, but it is less-than-optimal notation (it can be both you know). 2+4*6 is fine notation. Using extra parentheses for clarity is only necessary when division is involved.
Less-than-optimal notation in reference to the question in the OP. Guess I was being ambiguous...
|
On April 08 2011 11:29 MadVillain wrote:
But under no mathematical setting do people ever interpret 2+4*6 to be (2+4) * 6, that is a silly facetious example.
Do you actually think that people in a university setting interpret 1/xy as (1/x)*y ? No, they don't. The ambiguity arises from the fact that 2(9+3) is commonly viewed as a single unit, just as xy is.
This.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
