• mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 天前

    Yep, which is ab+ac=(b+c)a, so not (b+c)a=(ab+ac), duuuhh!!!

    It doesn’t say a=b, it says b=a! It doesn’t say equals, it says means! It’s not the property, it’s the law! It’s not the notation, it’s the convention! I’m not wrong, it’s just an exception!

    Fuck off.

    • It doesn’t say a=b, it says b=a!

      That’s right. If you’ve paid any attention at any time to everything I have said you would see me debunking people who say because axb=ab, that means ab=axb. It doesn’t! It’s right there in textbooks that ab=(axb), therefore done in the Brackets step 😂 The difference is it doesn’t say axb==ab, because, if it did say that it is identically equal, then indeed it would be true that ab=axb, but it’s not, so it isn’t. Not my fault you don’t know the difference between equals and identically equal 🙄

      BTW, again, here is a textbook saying ab=(axb)…

      And here’s a textbook about the difference between equals and identically equal…

      It doesn’t say equals, it says means!

      Yep! Now you’re getting it.

      It’s not the property, it’s the law!

      Yep!

      It’s not the notation, it’s the convention!

      rules actually. You were on a roll there for a bit

      I’m not wrong, it’s just an exception!

      No idea what you’re talking about

      Fuck off

      I’ll take that as an admission that you’re wrong then. See ya