Ok bro so answer my question

Deflection is the word you're looking for

what’s the result of the expression I wrote above?

So... you're telling me you don't know what comes first out of Brackets and Exponents in order of operations? That's your deflection strategy??

Whatever makes you feel better about your ignorance.

Says person who proved themselves wrong, and is now withdrawing from the conversation to hide their ignorance 😂

One day you’ll look back at this and think “damn, I really was an idiot back then!”

Says person who has run out of mental gymnastics that can be applied. I'll take that as an admission of being wrong then

Parentheses means evaluating the things inside the parentheses you nimrod

Only if you're still in Elementary school. How old are you anyway? Here's a high school Algebra book, you know, after students have been taught The Distributive Law...

I’m falling for the troll here

Just as well for you I've provided all the necessary evidence to prove them wrong then

I’m honestly disappointed that you just downvoted and left

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! I DIDN'T leave, quite demonstrably.

Challenging your beliefs with contrary ideas is the only way to improve them and understand the world in a more comprehensive and accurate way

So how come you won't then?

I should clarify that I haven’t responded to your “points” because there is nothing worth responding to

In other words, you have been proven wrong by them

Your arguments can all be debunked by reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations

Wikipedia can be comprehensively debunked by MATHS TEXTBOOKS - you know, those things you refuse to look at because they prove you are wrong 😂

I didn’t bother doing it myself.

So in other words, Wikipedia is all you had, and, having been disproven by Maths textbooks, you've got nothing

I will be blocking you

An admission of defeat then

I feel that the deleted post is in itself a very good final word to this disappointment of a “conversation”

Feel free to unblock me when you're ready to take your own advice

if it is not entirely accurate

Just like all your other posts then

Goodbye

Don't let the door hit you on the way out

Bro directly after what you underlined it says “if you want to remove the brackets”

Yep, that's right, and removing brackets is the first step in order of operations 😂

Selective reading much?

By you apparently.

“If” means optional

So... you're telling me that the "B" step in BEDMAS, and the "P" step in PEMDAS, is optional? I don't have to remove Brackets?? 😂 Better go back to school dude

You are free to solve what’s inside the brackets first, before multiplying it with what’s outside

Yep, but inside the brackets, as per the text you can see in the screenshot 😂

5(8-5)=(5x8-5x5)=(40-25)=15

5(8-5)=5(3)=(5x3)=15 <== Multiplication inside the Brackets, as per The Distributive Law

same answer both ways 😂

the link I posted is literally titled “distributive law”, not property

But has a multiply sign in it, thus proving it is the Property that they are talking about - The Distributive Property of Multiplication over Addition to call it by it's full name

You realize a law can have conditions, right?

You realise it literally must be obeyed, right? The condition that The Distributive Law has, is "A number or letter next to a Bracket", direct quote from the textbook, hence a(b+c)=(ab+ac), and not ax(b+c) since the a is not next to the bracket in that case

I’m not wrong.

says person who has no evidence whatsoever to show that they are correct, so as I said, no matter how many times you repeat it, you are still wrong 😂

You never asked for citations.

And the questions I did ask you didn't answer anyway, because you know in both cases it proves you wrong. Notice how I didn't need you to ask me for evidence to produce it? That's what people who are backed up by facts can do 😂

you did it for me with your screenshot

Which proved you were wrong 😂

But here you go

Well, here you go proving you have a severe comprehension problem anyway... 😂

Multiplying by a number is the same as dividing by its reciprocal and vice versa

Yep, gives the same result, but does not say that the number and it's inverse are the same thing 😂

Here’s another source if you’re allergic to Wikipedia

Which also wasn't a Maths textbook 😂 So far you're only proving my point that you can't cite any Maths textbooks that agree with you

Again, the mnemonics, when taught without appropriate context

Which they never are

cause people to think that 9-3+2 is 4

Nope, no-one thinks that. Addition first for 9-3+2 is +(9+2)-3=+11-3=8 same correct answer as left to right, which is why the textbook teaches you to do it that way 😂

If you understand what is multiplication and what is addition

Which you're demonstrated repeatedly that you don't, and here we are

who think that the order of operations is set to: Multiplication → Division → Addition → Subtraction

Which is a totally valid thing to do, as is taught by the textbook 🙄

instead of being (M or D, start from the left) → (A or S, start from the left)

Which is also a valid thing to do. That's the whole point, it does not matter which order you do addition and subtraction 😂

when the actual result is 8, because they think that they have to calculate the addition first

And when they do calculate the addition first, they get an answer of 8, as I just proved a few comments back 😂 Add all the positive numbers, then subtract the total of all the negative numbers. This is so not complicated, and yet you seem to have trouble understanding it

Where did you get the 1 and 3 from?

From an example of how 2+2 and 1+3 aren't the same thing, even though they equal the same value, which you are now trying to avoid addressing because you know it proves you are wrong 😂

Do you not know what fractions are…?

I'm starting to wonder if you do, given you think 2/2 is the same thing as 2x½ - one has a fraction, the other doesn't, but you think they are the same thing 🙄

You’re so very, very confused by all of this

says person not remembering that they brought it up to begin with... 😂

you have absolutely fundamental lacks in understanding of maths

says person who thinks doing addition first for 9-3+2 is 4 😂

maths textbooks all over the world use brackets all the time

Not for 2-2 they don't. Go ahead and cite one. I'll wait

you can write 2 - 2 as -2 + 2, or - a slightly less legible version - as 2 + -2. You’ll get the same result, and this inversion is a perfectly “legal” mathematical operation. Which shows you how addition and subtraction are equal

Which proves my point that you can do addition and subtraction in any order, given you just admitted that 2-2 and -2+2 give the same result 😂

One more time, let me

deflect from the point, yet again

We were not talking about monomials

No, we were talking about textbooks teaching to do addition first, and you then deflected into talking about monomials, because you knew it proved you were wrong 😂

If you set the pronumerals in addition/subtraction problems to 1, you would have

The exact same thing as an expression written without pronumerals 😂 I see you're still not understanding how pronumerals work then

difference between -2 + 2 and 2 - 2 is the same, proving - again - that subtraction is equal to addition of a negative

and thus proving again that they can be done in any order 😂 It's so hilarious watching you prove yourself wrong

Which is my point. Which you are proving

No, you're actually proving my point 🤣

I didn’t have to, you did it for me.

I only posted things that prove you wrong, but apparently I don't need to because you are proving yourself wrong 🤣

Now do -(2+4) + (1+3) and guess what you have?

The exact same answer, -2, again proving you can do them in any order 🤣

I already suggested this: read it again, but slower.

It still says add all positive numbers first, then subtract the total of the negative numbers. I'm not sure what you think is going to happen - are you expecting the words to magically change if you read it slowly? 🤣

it’s actually a kind of “mental exercise” for me

Yep, mental gymnastics left, right, and centre 😂

This guy thinks 3(2+1) gets the wrong answer if you do 3(3)

No I don't, liar. Hilarious that now you're having to resort to making things up 😂

instead of 32+31

Which can definitely give wrong answers

1/3(2+1)=1/(6+3)=(1/9)

1/3(3)=1/(3x3)=(1/9) same answer

1/3x2+3x1=(3/2)+3 Oops! WRONG ANSWER 😂

proceed knowing it’s all you’re going to get

All you're going to get from me is facts, correct, as opposed to you who can't come up with any facts! 😂

I have said why this style of debate is bad in greater detail here: https://lemmy.world/post/39377635/21030374

Which I debunked here

no it is not a step in PE(MD)(AS)

So... you're saying the "P" step in PEMDAS isn't a step in PEMDAS?? This is hilarious given you were just talking about contradictions 😂

Again, you have not understood my point

Maybe because saying the "P" step in PEMDAS isn't a step in PEMDAS makes no sense at all 😂

you categorically fail to engage with any argument.

No, I comprehensively debunked all of your points and deflections. 😂

I don’t think you even understand what it means to do so

says person who keeps avoiding the textbook screenshots and worked examples proving them wrong

I will not respond further to either thread

Yay! Don't let the door hit you on the way out 😂

I really want to have a good discussion about this

says person who deleted their previous post when I proved how wrong it was 😂

it is not possible with your debate style

There's no debate - the rules are in Maths textbooks, which you want to pretend don't exist

You fail to understand the argument your opponent is making

You haven't got one. That's why you keep pretending Maths textbooks don't exist

By divorcing each partial statement from its surrounding context

says person who deleted one of their posts to remove the context. 😂 The context is the rules of Maths, in case you needed to be reminded 😂

you are likely to change its meaning

Nope. I'm still talking about the rules of Maths 😂

You are not making a point of your own

Ok, so here you are admitting to comprehension problems. Which part did you not understand in addition and subtraction can be done in any order? 😂

You are simply stating facts, opinions, or misunderstandings as if they are self-evidently true

You left out backing it up with textbook screenshots and worked examples 😂

without knowing why you believe them to be true.

There's no belief involved. It's easy enough to prove it yourself by doing the Maths 😂

it’s very easy to state two contradictory things without realizing it

And yet I never have. Why do you think that is? 😂

“No they can’t. The rules are universal”

Which is correct

“It’s only a convention, not a rule, as just proven”

Which is also correct, and in no way contradicts the previous point, and I have no idea why you think it does! 😂 The first point is about the rules, and the second point is about conventions, which isn't even the same thing

this also makes it hard for people to find the mistakes

That's because I'm not making any 😂

I can see that you don’t fully understand what I mean by “operator precedence”

Says person who in their other post claimed "addition first" for -1+3+2 is -(1+3+2) = -6, and not +(3+2)-1=4 😂

If your opponent also used this debate style,

Which you don't, given you have no evidence whatsoever to back up your points with 😂

ends up entirely divorced from the initial meaning

I've been on-point the whole time, and you keep trying to deflect from how wrong your statements are 😂

Please do not take these as insults

Well, obviously not, given I just proved they were all wrong 😂

allows you to understand why people know the brackets matter.

Except I've proven, repeatedly, that they don't, and so now you're trying to deflect from that (and deleted one of your posts to hide the evidence of how wrong you are) 😂

Some other pedantic notes you may find interesting

It's hilarious that you added in this in afterwards, hoping I wouldn't see it so you could claim the last word 😂

There is no “correct answer” to an expression without defining the order of operations on that expression

There is only one order of operations, defined in many Maths textbooks.

Addition, subtraction, etc. are mathematical necessities that must work the way they do

Hence the order of operations rules, found in Maths textbooks

But PE(MD)(AS) is something we made up

PEMDAS actually, and yes, it's only a convention, not the rules themselves

there is no actual reason why that must be the operator precedence rule we use

That's why it's only a convention, and not a rule.

this is what causes issues with communicating about these things.

Nope, doesn't cause any issues - the rules themselves are the same everywhere, and all of the different mnemonics all work

Your second example, -1+3+2=4, actually opens up an interesting can of worms

No it doesn't

so subtraction is a-b

Just -b actually

negation is -c

Which is still subtraction, from 0, because every operation on the numberline starts from 0, we just don't bother writing the zero (just like we don't bother writing the + sign when the expression starts with an addition).

a two-argument definition of subtraction

Subtraction is unary operator, not binary. If you're subtracting from another number, then that number has it's own operator that it's associated with (and might be an unwritten +), it's not associated with the subtraction at all.

you can also define -1 as a single symbol

No you can't. You can put it in Brackets to make it joined to the minus sign though, like in (-1)²=1, as opposed to -1²=-1

not as a negation operation followed by a positive one

The 1 can't be positive if it follows a minus sign - it's the rule of Left Associativity 😂

These distinctions are for the most part pedantic formalities

No, they're just you spouting more wrong stuff 😂

you could argue that -1+3+2 evaluated with addition having a higher precedence than subtraction is -(1+3+2) = -6

No, you can't. Giving addition a higher priority is +(3+2)-1=+5-1=4, as per Maths textbooks...

Isn’t that interesting?

No, all of it was wrong, again 😂