Thread: 6/2(1+2) =

Originally Posted by uninformed

ok, so because there is no symbol between the number directly before the brackets, it becomes part of the bracket equation?

yes!

Originally Posted by mick88

Mathematics is absolute, it does not have the options of two answers, hence the reason for formulae.

nope.
squareroot of 9, has two answers.


plus if it was absolute, we would have solved all the maths problems out there.

ok, here is another equation for you "who the **** am I ment to believe?"

Originally Posted by uninformed

ok, here is another equation for you "who the **** am I ment to believe?"

Me !


Bwahahahahahaha

other maths problems:

Theorem. A cat has nine tails.

Proof. No cat has eight tails. Since one cat has one more tail than no cat, it must have nine tails.

Originally Posted by Eevo

yes!

Um, no...?

You're implying that explicit multipliers carry less weight than implicit multipliers, which is not the case...

Originally Posted by mike_ie

Um, no...?

You're implying that explicit multipliers carry less weight than implicit multipliers, which is not the case...

it is most certainly the case.

as i said earlier,
The general consensus among "math" people is that "multiplication by juxtaposition" (also known as implicit multipliers) (that is, multiplying by just putting things next to each other (like a bracket), rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations

ive never known it to be otherwise

Originally Posted by Eevo

so 6/2x(1+2) is different to 6/2(1+2)
with "x" being the multiplier symbol.

Since the issues of correctness, conventions and ambiguity have arisen, I could probably be excused for pointing out that
so 6/2x(1+2) is different to 6/2(1+2)
should read
so 6/2x(1+2) is different from 6/2(1+2)

similar to

different from