Mog Spawn@lemmy.world to memes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agoMath is not a democracylemmy.worldimagemessage-square224linkfedilinkarrow-up1712arrow-down128
arrow-up1684arrow-down1imageMath is not a democracylemmy.worldMog Spawn@lemmy.world to memes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square224linkfedilink
minus-squaremindbleach@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·14 days agoYou weren’t talking about a(b+c), you were talking about a(b)2. Which doesn’t work the way you said… according to this maths textbook.
minus-square💡𝚂𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗆𝖺𝗇 𝙰𝗉𝗉𝗌📱linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·14 days ago You weren’t talking about a(b+c) Dude, I’ve always been talking about a(b+c) Mr. abysmal reading comprehension 🙄 you were talking about a(b)2. Nope! Textbooks write ab² if they mean (axb²). They never write a(b)² Which doesn’t work the way you said It works exactly the way I said 🙄 according to this maths textbook This Maths textbook is about a(bc)², not a(b+c) 🙄 You need remedial reading classes
minus-squaremindbleach@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·14 days agoYes, this textbook says a(bc)2 works differently from how you say it works. You don’t have an answer for that because you’re a fraud. If you want textbooks that also disprove how you pretend a(b+c)n works, here’s four in a row.
minus-square💡𝚂𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗆𝖺𝗇 𝙰𝗉𝗉𝗌📱linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·14 days ago Yes, this textbook says a(bc)2 works differently from how you say it works No it doesn’t 🤣🤣🤣 I have said the whole time that a(bc)²=ab²c², which is exactly what this textbook does 🙄 a(b+c) is different to a(bc)², duuuhhh 🙄 You don’t have an answer for that because you’re a fraud says person who can’t quote any part saying it works differently to how I said, and in fact quoted a part showing it works exactly how I said 🤣🤣🤣 If you want textbooks that also disprove how you pretend a(b+c)n works been telling you the whole time it’s irrelevent to a(b+c) which has no exponent Mr. False Equivalence 🙄
minus-squaremindbleach@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·14 days agoYou explicitly believe 2(8)2 is 22*82.
You weren’t talking about a(b+c), you were talking about a(b)2. Which doesn’t work the way you said… according to this maths textbook.
Dude, I’ve always been talking about a(b+c) Mr. abysmal reading comprehension 🙄
Nope! Textbooks write ab² if they mean (axb²). They never write a(b)²
It works exactly the way I said 🙄
This Maths textbook is about a(bc)², not a(b+c) 🙄 You need remedial reading classes
Yes, this textbook says a(bc)2 works differently from how you say it works.
You don’t have an answer for that because you’re a fraud.
If you want textbooks that also disprove how you pretend a(b+c)n works, here’s four in a row.
No it doesn’t 🤣🤣🤣 I have said the whole time that a(bc)²=ab²c², which is exactly what this textbook does 🙄 a(b+c) is different to a(bc)², duuuhhh 🙄
says person who can’t quote any part saying it works differently to how I said, and in fact quoted a part showing it works exactly how I said 🤣🤣🤣
been telling you the whole time it’s irrelevent to a(b+c) which has no exponent Mr. False Equivalence 🙄
You explicitly believe 2(8)2 is 22*82.