https://zeta.one/viral-math/

I wrote a (very long) blog post about those viral math problems and am looking for feedback, especially from people who are not convinced that the problem is ambiguous.

It’s about a 30min read so thank you in advance if you really take the time to read it, but I think it’s worth it if you joined such discussions in the past, but I’m probably biased because I wrote it :)

  • Kogasa
    link
    04 months ago

    The order of operations is not the same as the distributive law.

    • The first step in order of operations is solve brackets. The first step in solving unexpanded brackets is to expand them. i.e. The Distributive Law. i.e. the ONLY time The Distributive Law ISN’T part of order of operations is when there’s no unexpanded brackets in the expression.

      • Kogasa
        link
        14 months ago

        The distributive law has nothing to do with brackets.

        The distributive law can be written in PEMDAS as a(b+c) = ab + ac, or PEASMD as ab+c = (ab)+(ac). It has no relation to the notation in which it is expressed, and brackets are purely notational.

        • The distributive law has nothing to do with brackets

          BWAHAHAHA! Ok then, what EXACTLY does it relate to, if not brackets? Note that I’m talking about The Distributive LAW - which is about expanding brackets - not the Distributive PROPERTY.

          a(b+c) = ab + ac

          a(b+c)=(ab+ac) actually - that’s one of the common mistakes that people are making. You can’t remove brackets unless there’s only 1 term left inside, and ab+ac is 2 terms.

          ab+c = (ab)+(ac)

          No, never. ab+c is 2 terms with no further simplification possible. From there all that’s left is addition (once you know what ab and c are equal to).

          brackets are purely notational

          Yep, they’re a grouping symbol. Terms are separated by operators and joined by grouping symbols.