Okay, show THIS problem to any practicing mathematician recognized by his peers, absent any prompting concerning order of operations, etc, and I am very certain that I know how he or she will answer.

If x = 1 and y = 2, then what quantity is represented by the following expression?

2x÷3y

Practicing mathematicians will answer 1/3.

But the 288 people will answer 4/3.

That is my prediction. Let's test it!

(I also believe the mathematicians would answer 1/3 and 288-ers would answer 4/3 were the division symbol replaced by the slashy. Half credit for me if I'm right about that at least.)

Congrats Universitys agree with you and I would too

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2x%C3%B73y%2C+x%3D1%2C+y%3D2

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2x%2F3y%2C+x%3D1%2C+y%3D2

but they do not agree with you on the original question and neither do I.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29

*sigh* again see earlier posts about programming language and single-line prompts and input standardization and production efficiency

vs.

pure math

big difference.

Okay, show THIS problem to any practicing mathematician recognized by his peers, absent any prompting concerning order of operations, etc, and I am very certain that I know how he or she will answer.

If x = 1 and y = 2, then what quantity is represented by the following expression?

2x÷3y

Practicing mathematicians will answer 1/3.

But the 288 people will answer 4/3.

That is my prediction. Let's test it!

(I also believe the mathematicians would answer 1/3 and 288-ers would answer 4/3 were the division symbol replaced by the slashy. Half credit for me if I'm right about that at least.)

Same issue, assuming parenthesis that do not exist changes the outcome of the expression, and it is incorrect, even though W|A will think you mean (2x)/(2x) when you input 2x/2x, even though that is not technically correct. Kind of like auto-correct when you're typing in Microsoft Word. It's a courtesy afforded for simplicity's sake.

Any mathematician you pose that question to will smack you upside the head and tell you to stop trying to use purposefully ambiguous notation.

And to your whatever polish notation crap, you're just changing the meaning and order of presentation of symbols, not which mathematical principles take precedence over the other, as that is a fundamental definition of mathematics.

06/12/2012 02:52 PMPosted by

Sinew Notational conventions are directly related to order of operations, which is a fundamental principle of math. A math problem should never have a disputable answer. It can have many answers, infinite answers, but those answers are either right, or wrong. They either fulfill the constraints of the expression following the fundamental principles of math, or they don't. There is no ambiguity. This isn't about whether or not the MLA method is the correct way to site your sources. The rules of math are not open for debate. So yes, this is a discussion about the fundamental principles of math.

Correct. Where does bedmas or other OoO conventions mention vinculum (the bar separating fractions)? It doesn't directly. If you don't accept implied multiplication than you also don't accept that there is a difference between a fraction and normal division. They are the same concept.

x/y ÷ x/y

OoO left to right = x/y/x/y = x * 1/y * 1/x * 1/y = 1/y^2

Convention = x/y * y/x = xy/xy = 1

xy ÷ xy

OoO left to right = x * y ÷ x * y = y^2

standard convention = xy * 1/xy = xy/xy = 1

That's not true,

OoO left to right = [(x/y)/x]/y = 1/y * 1/y = 1/(y^2)

And your second example,

xy ÷ xy

OoO left to right = [(x*y)/x]*y=y^2 which is correct.

I think you're very confused.

Did I miss any other fail out there?