Can’t even figure out what “PDF page 27” means, having been led by the nose
except it was on Page 26 of the PDF 🙄
Hey which side of the parentheses is that u on?
I saw this in another textbook just this week - it’s u for units, as in litres, kilograms, etc., so it goes on the side that units go. i.e. after the number 😂
In full contravention of your made-up bullshit calling this 2020s textbook “outdated?”
No it isn’t! 🤣🤣🤣 Also, I have no idea what year that is from anyway, given it’s not in the PDF 🙄
Thank you for the genuine laugh. Fuck right off with your new made-up exceptions. Incompetent fraud.
A textbook with a URL on every pagefold says you’re full of shit; it’s not a modernity problem. It’s you. Everyone knows it’s you. I am the only person on this website dumb enough to humor you, and even I know it’s you.
You’re the one arguing that there’s an exception to The Distributive Law, not me.
Variables can just go wherever
Nope, coefficients have to be on the left, and units go on the right. It’s not complicated
You found yet another counterexample to your own bullshit
says person who was talking about a page that wasn’t even about The Distributive Law to begin with. 😂 I guess in your world then 2x3=6 is a “counter example” to 2+3=5, and you thus think 2+3=5 is “bullshit” 🤣🤣🤣
I quoted a textbook proving you wrong and you jumped through your ass to pretend it didn’t. ‘They used the letter u, so that’s different because I say so!’ No. You made it up.
And it still proves you wrong, because it’s still putting a variable after parentheses, which you said modern textbooks should never do. You’re bitching about a PDF having goofy page numbering and ignoring that this modern maths textbook says, shut the hell up.
says person not providing a screenshot of me saying that. I always say pronumeral, which proves you’re paraphrasing your poor comprehension of what I actually said 🙄 I can tell you that I was talking about we never write (b+c)a=(ab+ac), so go ahead and find one that does
‘Well of course unit variables go after brackets!’
Are you saying that’s wrong?? 🤣🤣🤣
Show me any textbook making that distinction. One
The one you just posted a screenshot of! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It says “distributive property” right next to it
Yep, and not Distributive Law, duuuuhhh!!! 🤣🤣🤣 I already pointed that out first time around for this.
next to the part that proves you wrong
There isn’t any part that proves I’m wrong! None of it was about The Distributive Law! 🤣🤣🤣
Literally the screenshot above, which you provided, says (b+c)a=(ab+ac). 17u+25u=(17+25)u.
Are you saying that’s wrong?
I am explicitly calling you an incompetent fraud for trying to make the distinction. Do you need it in shorter words?
u is not a unit, in that screenshot. It’s just u. Like how the problem is just you.
Shown a textbook where a variable gets distributed after the brackets, to disprove where you’re still saying, right now, that distribution cannot go after the brackets… you make up some bullshit about how that variable is speeecial. Show me any printed text saying so, or fuck off.
except it was on Page 26 of the PDF 🙄
I saw this in another textbook just this week - it’s u for units, as in litres, kilograms, etc., so it goes on the side that units go. i.e. after the number 😂
No it isn’t! 🤣🤣🤣 Also, I have no idea what year that is from anyway, given it’s not in the PDF 🙄
Thank you for the genuine laugh. Fuck right off with your new made-up exceptions. Incompetent fraud.
A textbook with a URL on every pagefold says you’re full of shit; it’s not a modernity problem. It’s you. Everyone knows it’s you. I am the only person on this website dumb enough to humor you, and even I know it’s you.
Found it. Units on the right. Proves you are the incompetent fraud, again 🤣🤣🤣 Or do you not know that m is for metres?? 🤣🤣🤣
No mention of an exception. Variables can just go wherever. You found yet another counterexample to your own bullshit.
You’re the one arguing that there’s an exception to The Distributive Law, not me.
Nope, coefficients have to be on the left, and units go on the right. It’s not complicated
says person who was talking about a page that wasn’t even about The Distributive Law to begin with. 😂 I guess in your world then 2x3=6 is a “counter example” to 2+3=5, and you thus think 2+3=5 is “bullshit” 🤣🤣🤣
Math doesn’t change based on what variables represent.
Coefficients go on the left, as opposed to units which go on the right 🙄
Irrelevant screenshot spam.
Math doesn’t change based on what variables represent.
says person still unable to produce anything that agrees with them
That’s hilarious that you find what’s in Maths textbooks laughable. No wonder you have no idea how to do Maths! 🤣🤣🤣
not me. I saw in in a Maths textbook 🙄 You know, those things you never look in
And yet somehow you weren’t able to link to that page 🤣🤣🤣
No it doesn’t! 🤣🤣🤣
Is this “everyone” in the room with us right now?
well, you got something right then 🤣🤣🤣
says person still unable to cite any Maths textbooks that agree with them 🙄
I quoted a textbook proving you wrong and you jumped through your ass to pretend it didn’t. ‘They used the letter u, so that’s different because I say so!’ No. You made it up.
And it still proves you wrong, because it’s still putting a variable after parentheses, which you said modern textbooks should never do. You’re bitching about a PDF having goofy page numbering and ignoring that this modern maths textbook says, shut the hell up.
No you didn’t! 🤣🤣🤣
Nope, I told you what I saw in another textbook just this week 🙄
says the person actually making things up because they can’t rebut what’s in textbooks 🤣🤣🤣
a variable representing units, which do go afterwards 🙄
Not if they’re talking about Distribution they shouldn’t, but the textbook you posted isn’t talking about Distribution 🙄
No it doesn’t! It’s not even a page about Distribution 🤣🤣🤣
‘Variable never go after the brackets!’ Here’s a book showing it can. ‘Well of course unit variables go after brackets!’
Show me any textbook making that distinction. One.
It says “distributive property” right next to it.
The maths textbook says “distributive property” right next to the part that proves you wrong.
says person not providing a screenshot of me saying that. I always say pronumeral, which proves you’re paraphrasing your poor comprehension of what I actually said 🙄 I can tell you that I was talking about we never write (b+c)a=(ab+ac), so go ahead and find one that does
Are you saying that’s wrong?? 🤣🤣🤣
The one you just posted a screenshot of! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yep, and not Distributive Law, duuuuhhh!!! 🤣🤣🤣 I already pointed that out first time around for this.
There isn’t any part that proves I’m wrong! None of it was about The Distributive Law! 🤣🤣🤣
Literally the screenshot above, which you provided, says (b+c)a=(ab+ac). 17u+25u=(17+25)u.
I am explicitly calling you an incompetent fraud for trying to make the distinction. Do you need it in shorter words?
u is not a unit, in that screenshot. It’s just u. Like how the problem is just you.
Shown a textbook where a variable gets distributed after the brackets, to disprove where you’re still saying, right now, that distribution cannot go after the brackets… you make up some bullshit about how that variable is speeecial. Show me any printed text saying so, or fuck off.
says person revealing their deep comprehension problems 🤣🤣🤣
Yep, which is ab+ac=(b+c)a, so not (b+c)a=(ab+ac), duuuhh!!! 🤣🤣🤣
says person with proven comprehension problems 🙄
and why do you think they chose u, and not, you know, x, y, a, or b? 😂
Nope! It was not Distributed, it was Factorised. You don’t seem to understand anything at all about Maths 🙄
to which you posted Factorising 🤣🤣🤣
I’ve just shown you one which says it’s Factorising, since you don’t seem to understand how that’s different to Distribution 🙄