• LopensLeftArm
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    And there you’ve proven exactly what I’ve been saying all along. 2x works the way it does because there’s a variable involved, and natural reading of that treats it as a single entity. There are no variables in the equation in the post, there are only definite numbers, parentheses, and simple mathematical operations. 8/2(2+2) is nothing more than 8/2×(2+2). There is nothing special about 2(…, this is not the equivalent of 2x.

    • Primarily0617@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      a natural reading of 2(2+2) treats it as the same

      you’re straight up just spouting contradictory nonsense now because you’ve realised your stance doesn’t make any sense, and i am very much here for it

      • LopensLeftArm
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        No, what I’m explaining to you is the facts behind what every calculator with any modicum of computing power will tell you, namely that 2(2+2) is identical to 2×(2+2).

          • LopensLeftArm
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yeah, kind of. The crappier calculator is the one generating the incorrect answer. Any calculator with any real level of oomph behind it can parse this correctly to get the correct answer, 16.

              • LopensLeftArm
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                The good calculator is the one using the processing power of the phone to handle the programming necessary to correctly interpret the order of operations and arrive at the correct answer, whereas the bad calculator - despite having no ads - is a cheap piece of trash unable to contain the necessary computational logic to arrive at the correct answer.

                  • LopensLeftArm
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    No need. The fact that you’re incapable of comprehending it at this point indicates that any further attempts to explain it to you are equally likely to fall on deaf ears.

    • 2x works the way it does because there’s a variable involved, and natural reading of that treats it as a single entity

      Just like 2(2+2) is also a single Term.

      no variables in the equation in the post, there are only definite numbers

      Pronumerals literally stand in for numerals, and work exactly the same way. There is nothing special about choosing a pronumeral to represent a numeral.

      8/2(2+2) is nothing more than 8/2×(2+2).

      They’re completely different actually. 2(2+2) is a single term in the denominator, (2+2) - which you separated from the 2 with an x - is a now 3rd term which is now in the numerator, having been separated from the 2 which is in the denominator.

      There is nothing special about 2(…, this is not the equivalent of 2x

      So what’s it equal to when x=2+2?