[Closed] 2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2-2+2 x 0?

"All that demostrates is that you don't know how to use your calculator properly. "

I entered it in exactly the same way on excel, and got 26.

I'm perfectly aware of how to get the correct answer on my calculator. But that relies on using a convention, which as I said, isn't maths.

.

it's just a convention, not maths. The argument about maths being right or wrong is irrelevant.

[code]y = mx + c[/code]

So is that:

[code]y = m (x + c)[/code]

or

[code]y = (mx) + c[/code]

??

How about:
[code]1 + 3²[/code]

So is that 10 or 16?

The [i]convention[/i] [u]IS[/u] maths.

It's a convention to tell you where the parentheses are. Not maths.

Operator precedence is part of maths.

GrahamS may be an Apple loving freak, but he's 100% right on the fact that the convention [b]is[/b] maths.

isn't maths

pedant point - correct isn't it arithmetic?

Arithmetic is a "branch" of mathematics 😉

teamhurtmore - Member

Is this the perfect STW thread?

1. Deviation from MTB
2. Interesting question (albeit it with hidden trap)
3. Evidence that threads can be misinterpreted (the zeros, read this as an oral question, the 26s as a written one)
4. Errors
5. Debate
6. Abuse
7. Defensiveness
8. Bigotry
9. Ya, boo, sucks
10. Finally humour

It fails perfection on one point... It wasn't mistakenly posted in the Bike Forum...

As I said earlier... and in agreement with Graham and the others just above...

Without convention there is no mathematics.

I could work in gribbles and farks but without there being some convention that allows you to interpret what those mean, then it's pretty much all meaningless.

Oh, and it doesn't tell you where the parentheses are, they could be added in but are wholly unnecessary as the precedence of the operators already contains that information.

maths

Or math?

they could be added in but are wholly necessary as the precedence of the operators already contains that information.

Wholly necessary?

Make your mind up 🙂

Oh, and it doesn't tell you where the parentheses are, they could be added in but are wholly [un]necessary as the precedence of the operators already contains that information.

Ed Zackerly.

Also the parentheses are part of the same "convention" anyway, as they are the P in PEMDAS (or the B in BODMAS).

If you understand that you do the bit in brackets first then you are already following [i]the convention[/i].

Or math?

Only if you study mathematic.

ebygomm... I have no idea what you could mean...

😉

I only just noticed that the new windows calculator does operator precedence for you. It seems like cheating to me - you should know how to interpret it and enter it accordingly.

Just for fun I tried it in SQL Server as well:

select 2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2-2+2*0

-----------
26

(1 row(s) affected)

Type it as written into Windows calculator will get you 0.

Not on modern Windows (i.e. Windows 7)

XP here. Open calculator. 'View' dropdown. Select 'scientific'. Type it in and out pop the correct answer. Which is 26.

Born to a math[b]s[/b] teacher, it's 26 🙂

I have to admit, speaking as a software engineer, I would ALWAYS put brackets in anything like this. Not because the computer needs them, but because I know my fellow engineers [s]are idiots[/s] may not have had their coffee when they read it

Yeah I probably would aracer.

[code]output = input + (offset * offsetScale);[/code]

In fact our coding standards insist on it and I'd pull someone up in a code review if they didn't do it.

It shouldn't be needed, but anything that makes someone stop and think even for a second while reading simple code like that should be eliminated.

elf's quiet.....
Thankfully

Probably off spoiling someone else's thread, which he didn't understand either.

Diddums. Someone stole your dinner money too? 😆

Yay! Someone has learned something. AND a pretty girl talked to me. About Maths!
My day is complete.

(Flushes Graham's head down the bogs. Tips contents of his school satchel (not sports bayg like normal kids, a flipping [i]satchel[/i] ffs...) into urinal. Gives Graham a wedgie in front of the girls. Blows smoke in Emsz' face, knowing this will undoubtedly make her fancy him)

[i]*sobs*[/i]

I thought we'd agree to be friends after I made you £600?

You've totally ruined my favourite jotter cover now.
My mum will be so cross.

Jotter?

[i]Jotter[/i]???

Gis it ear...

(Grabs it, sets light to it)

ransos - Member
The answer using conventional notation is obviously 26. But as has already been pointed out - it's just a convention, not maths.

Maths is a collection of coventions. Some of them contradict, some of them don't. Unless you want to not care about anything with numbers in, you'd better start using the standard set of conventions for standard questions.

My answer's 32.

Base 8 and BODMAS

In fact our coding standards insist on it and I'd pull someone up in a code review if they didn't do it.

(Grabs it, sets light to it)

Nooooooo.... Optimuuuuussssss.... Bumblebee.... Shockwave... ... whyyyyyyy?

Really? Fairly sure I've never had a coding standard which insisted on that

Yep - financial, military and medical embedded software - we are pretty strict about [i]anything[/i] that can cause confusion.

111111111x111111111=

No calculators.

[i]financial, military and medical embedded software[/i]

all at once? that must be confusing?

123456..[i]can't be arsed counting the 1's[/i]....654321

all at once? that must be confusing?

Yep. Soldier gets shot and we work out if the budget will cover his medical expenses 😀

123456787654321

Or is it binary?

financial, military and medical embedded software

111111111x111111111=

Elf,

Loling at the school thing. I would have helped GrahamS.

Yeah Aracer's right (maybe); I missed off a 1 in each line. Thought it was 8 1's instead of nine. 😳

Bloody tricky to see on the screen tbh.

Calculator gives an error on that sum anyway. Too much for it poor little thing. 🙁

Enough already. Mind-stretching but I've got ADHD. Probbly why I never really enjoyed Maffs much.

I would have helped GrahamS.

(Feels spurned. Gets angry, Stabs nerdy maffs kid in eye with biro. Is taken out of lessons and made to see Educational Psychologist. Again)

you're possibly talking about safety critical software

Yep. MISRA standards plus some of our own. Generally very strict.

I would have helped GrahamS.

Yaaay! Can you help me wring my satchel out?

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh... my beautiful retina...

Elfinsafety - Member

elf's quiet.....
Thankfully

Probably off spoiling someone else's thread, which he didn't understand either.

Diddums. Someone stole your dinner money too?

Its just getting a bit tedious you jumping in threads that you're clearly not interested in, yet feel you need to disrupt the discussion and make smart ass comments in the direction of those who understand whats being said.
Whilst you do make valid points on other threads, you let yourself down on this thread by trying to be clever and take the micky out of others. Its a form of bullying and isn't wanted or needed here. 🙄

bigyinn for Head Boy 😉

Not likely, they caught me with matches last week 😕

Yeah Aracer's right

Its just getting a bit tedious you jumping in threads that you're clearly not interested in, yet feel you need to disrupt the discussion and make smart ass comments in the direction of those who understand whats being said.

Hey dude, lighten up! 😆

(Passes sneaky spliff to BigYinn)

I don't see the OP being particularly upset by my intervention in this thread (apart form the 'jotter' thing...). And I've found it enjoyable [i]and[/i] interesting. 😀

So chill out...

Oh and I even had a go at that other sum even though I din't read it propply. 😳

Been discussing this with friends in email, apparently im stupid and didnt go to primary school for thinking the answer was 0....

Something interesting or not which may have been mentioned already...if you use windows calc and do say 2+2x2= you will get 8, put it in scientific mode and you get 6 as it assumes the brackets around 2x2 so I would argue that the correct answer to the initial thread question is 0 on the grounds that its been written badly 🙂

Whilst you do make valid points on other threads

[Citation needed]

I would argue

If you'd read the rest of the thread, you perhaps wouldn't. (-:

Ermmm I read the first page and have skipped to the end...

Did Dijsktra's shunting yard get a mention?

Did Dijsktra's shunting yard get a mention?

Half of them are struggling with the concept of operator precedence, so I really wouldn't go there 😀

Something interesting or not which may have been mentioned already...if you use windows calc and do say 2+2x2= you will get 8, put it in scientific mode and you get 6 as it assumes the brackets around 2x2 so I would argue that the correct answer to the initial thread question is 0 on the grounds that its been written badly

In scentific mode it doesn't put brackets round the 2x2, the operator logic is such that it performs the multiplication before the addition as it should do. Calculators/computers are only as good as the operator. Just because a calculator spits out an answer doesn't mean that the answer is correct. Total trust in the answers that are returned from computers (without questioning whether it might be the result of an incorrect input or other mistake on the part of the operator) is a worrying trend that I see more and more in my line of work.

The original question is not "written badly" and the answer to that particular sum as it was written is 26.

Elfinsafety - Member
(Passes sneaky spliff to BigYinn)

Goo on; it's History next and a nice spliff always sets you up right for that....

Go on then. Green or block?

Nice bit of sticky black Leb.

None of that Skunk though; if they bung on disturbing footage from WW2 or something it can get too heavy. 😯

[url= http://blackboardsinporn.blogspot.com/ ]Perfect for this thread, probably not worksafe but not as bad as the link suggests :-)[/url]

Total trust in the answers that are returned from computers (without questioning whether it might be the result of an incorrect input or other mistake on the part of the operator) is a worrying trend that I see more and more in my line of work.

I can input the question in exactly the same way on two different machines (one a Casio calculator, the other an Excel spreadsheet) and get two different answers. If the question was not so easy to estimate, you'd need prior knowledge about the way in which the calculator/ spreadsheet operates in order to ensure that the question was entered in accordance with convention.

Can I have a go on that next, history bores me stupid.

you'd need prior knowledge about the way in which the calculator/ spreadsheet operates in order to ensure that the question was entered in accordance with convention.

yes. That is normal.

Try working out [code]cos 180°[/code] on your calculator.

yes. That is normal.

Yeeesss, but if you recognise that you need to change the input depending on the machine you're using, then you'll recognise that calculating the equation isn't as simple as some are making out. Obviously, this example can be worked out mentally, but what if it couldn't?

Here you go then Emsz.

Then it's Art later they keep promising to get someone in to pose for a Life Drawing class but you just know it's going to be some wrinkly old codger not some buffsome young lass. 🙁

You know that Miss B takes us for Home Economics never wears a bra....

Obviously, this example can be worked out mentally, but what if it couldn't?

Then you'd have to know what the rules are that determine the order you work it out in?

Again [code]y = mx+c[/code]

If you don't know the rules then that equation is useless to you.

And Gödel help you if you try to solve quadratic equations:

[img] [/img]

Yeeesss, but if you recognise that you need to change the input depending on the machine you're using, then you'll recognise that calculating the equation isn't as simple as some are making out.

Surely all that proves is that one of the devices used to do the calculation is wrong.

In which case I'd take it back and complain!

😀

Then it's Art later they keep promising to get someone in to pose for a Life Drawing class but you just know it's going to be some wrinkly old codger not some buffsome young lass

+1=300

done it before aracer, was OK, got paid £20 for it. 😆

If the question was not so easy to estimate, you'd need prior knowledge about the way in which the calculator/ spreadsheet operates in order to ensure that the question was entered in accordance with convention

Well of course you do. You have to know the limitations of any tool before you can use it properly. Calculators don't do the maths for you, you have to think about it and make sure the inputs are correct for what you want to achieve. There are many different types of logic that calculators use, reverse polish being one that is thankfully dying out.

Surely all that proves is that one of the devices used to do the calculation is wrong.

In which case I'd take it back and complain!

No, it tells us that we have two different answers. They could both be wrong.

There are many different types of logic that calculators use

Precisely. So it's a bit much to expect average Joe to automatically know what particular method a given calculator is using.

No, it tells us that we have two different answers. They could both be wrong.

But one answer is correct, and we know which that is...

Or are you still actually arguing that the answer could be 0?

So it's a bit much to expect average Joe to automatically know what particular method a given calculator is using.

Without the instruection manual yes, but then it's not too much to expect average Joe to have a knowledge of primary school maths.

Wow. Just wow. You guys.

I went to primary school in the 80's. I have a very very dim recollection of this BODMAS chappie, mainly as Another Stupid Acronym I'll Never Remember.

I don't recall ever being taught the acronym to be honest.
We were just expected to know the correct order. It isn't exactly hard (for most).

But one answer is correct, and we know which that is...

Or are you still actually arguing that the answer could be 0?

I've never argued that the answer is 0. I argue that the answer is 26, using conventional notation.

But that's irrelevant. What if you can't work out the question in your head? How will you know which machine is telling you the right answer?

done it before aracer, was OK, got paid £20 for it.

You've allowed yourself to be ruthlessly exploited for the gratification of perverts? 😯

Because that's what it is. Let's not lie about it, folks.

Emsz; when I was at school, a lass your age, in the altogether, wooduv caused a riot. 😆

And that was a mixed school. In my first secondary school, an all boys one, some of the sickly kids wooduv had to be taken to hospital probbly.

Miss H used to wear stockings. So did Miss R and she was well fit. She was a right cah though; Miss H was nice.

Ah....

(Uses innocent maffs thread for nefarious and sordid purposes. Is a little bit ashamed but not much really)

How will you know which machine is telling you the right answer?

Well you can quickly establish whether it is doing operator precedence for you or not by entering:
[code]2 + 3 x 3[/code].
If you get 15 then it doesn't. If you get 11 then it does.

Or you could just enter things in the correct order of evaluation and it won't be an issue.

What if you can't work out the question in your head? How will you know which machine is telling you the right answer?

Well in that case, how can you tell if any machine is ever telling you the right answer?

And not just machines, what about people too?

I'd suggest that if you can't tell which is the right answer, you are not qualified to ask the question? 😉

It was always drummed into me when at school, and beyond, that the calculator/computer is there to help, but it does not, and cannot, do your thinking for you. You still need to understand what you are asking it to do.

It was always drummed into me when at school, and beyond, that the calculator/computer is there to help, but it does not, and cannot, do your thinking for you. You still need to understand what you are asking it to do.

Gee, thanks for the tip. 🙄

It's a fairly simple point, which I doubt is well-explained to school children: that different machines may give you different answers for a given input, none of them necessarily correct.

I must admit that prior to this thread, I hadn't realised that some calculators use operator precedence and some don't.

Back in the day, when I were lad, etc [u]no[/u] calculators did operator precedence. That would be magical. The ones we used were only one technological step away from the adding machines with levers on the side that I vaguely remember my dad using at the bank.

[img] [/img]

Ahhh.. simpler times. (I'm [i]only[/i] 36)

I don't recall ever being taught the acronym to be honest.
We were just expected to know the correct order. It isn't exactly hard (for most).

I'm in complete agreement. But at 9 its difficult to grasp that the acronym is immaterial, and this hazy (at the time) concept of operator precedence is rather important ... particularly if you can get all the way to a B at A level completely ignorant of operator precedence beyond 'do the stuff in brackets first' 🙂

You're all missing the point - emsz was offering to strip off for £20.

Yep, I don't now how anyone managed to get through algebra if they didn't understand that:

[code]A = B x C + D[/code] is the same as [code]A = D + B x C[/code]

or what order they should do [code]ax² + bx + c[/code] in.

You're all missing the point - emsz was offering to strip off for £20.

She was not, actually. Only in your sick, twisted depraved stinking cess-pit of a mind....

I was once offered I think it was twenty pounds or something to strip for some lasses out on a hen night, as the stripper they'd booked had cancelled.

[i]Twenty pounds[/i]. For a bunch of leering lewd coarse women to debase me to nothing more than an object for their sordid sexual gratification.

Actually, now I put it in those terms.....

Fiddlesticks. 😐

It's a fairly simple point, which I doubt is well-explained to school children: that different machines may give you different answers for a given input, none of them necessarily correct.

But the point of teaching people maths, and the conventions of maths is that everyone works with the same ideas about what's going on. it's a language. Unless you're breaking new ground (and we're really not here!) you can't answer a question according to your own logic and claim that it's equally valid. Or turn up for an interview at an engineering company and say that you prefer to work in base 8 but 12 on a Wednesday.

Edit: didn't read your posts properly. Don't disagree with you, but don't entirely know what you're arguing? Saying that people shouldn't be quoting results from caluculators to support their answers?