Why are Americans so fucking retarded?

It is an intentional sabotage.

The long march is complete.

this

Multiplication and division are done at the same priority.

PRIORITY = OPERATION
1 = Parenthesis
2 = Exponent
3 = Division, Mult
4 = Add, Sub

It’s gonna get worse with libraries and schools getting kneecapped by the billionaire class. They do not want an educated population, or else their kids look stupid in comparison.

If you want to get technical, the exponent / nth root are the same priority, but parenthesis is first.

Just nuke us from orbit...

If this idiots salary was calculated using one such equation and they used the “equally correct” solution to pay her less, shed chimp out.

You have no idea how retarded some teachers are.

No I'm just saying some people are living the brackets which makes them think they have to do 5 * 4 first
I know it's 16

One word: Department of Edumacation

I need more context

you cannot assume (4) is outside of the divisor
therefore it's 1 unless there was a * between the 5 and the (

1x1=2

16 is the only correct answer any other is fucking retard shit.

That's a fine explanation. I'm glad you brought the topic up.

The answer is 1. Midwits need not reply to my post.

BEDMAS

1x1 = 1 = 1
1x2 = 1 + 1 = 2
1x3 = 1 + 1 + 1 = 3
1x4 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4
...
2x1 = 2 = 2
2x2 = 2 + 2 = 4
2x3 = 2 + 2 + 2 = 6
2x4 = 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 8
...

If you aren't distributing into the parenthesis you're fucked up, brain damaged.
It's 1.

The answer is; sz
Because I sayz so

This is a vinculum and computerized equation issue known from the dawn of the first ones that used vacuum tubes, and the acronym is PE (MD) (AS) because multiplication/division from left to right and addition/subtraction left to right.

libtards are only 20% of the population. 80% is sane. its only that libtards have all the important seats

yes they both are equally correct because the syntax is flawed

the syntax is perfectly defined. you are just a retard

Common core was actually not a completely terrible idea (teaching kids to understand the underlying concepts of numbers, mathematical operations, etc. rather than just blindly applying arithmetic), but alas, they underestimated how retarded public school teachers (and the general public) actually are, and it turns out they didn't understand how math works either. If I'm being generous, I could vaguely see how maybe this was a lesson intended to teach the idea that the order of operations is (technically) arbitrary, but the way it's presented here is probably just going to confuse kids.

Frankly, if I was the head of the DoEd, I would abolish infix notation and teach kids based RPN instead. Every child will be required to own an HP calculator.

another stupid debate shit thread about some stupid ambiguous calculus garbage that could be solved by using proper notation

Nice fake picture.

That equation is NOT written 20/ 5 * (2 * 2) even though you want it to be.

Oh look, another retard who doesn't like something solely because it's different.

In traditional math, PEMDAS is the system we use to disambiguate the order of operations. This is completely arbitrary and we could have just as easily decided that we always do addition first or whatever the fuck. It's not etched into the laws of the fucking universe that we HAVE to do PEMDAS to do math.

Both answers are valid depending on the process you use. As long as you make it clear what the order of operations is, you'll get to a correct answer. If anything, being able to comprehend and adapt to either process is a sign of greater intelligence than some dipshit mindlessly regurgitating the exact same process because that's how they were taught as kids. Get with the times.

You are a retard.

1. (2*2)=4
It now says 20/5*4
2. 5*4=20
3. 20/20 = 1
You are ignoring the invisible * between 5 and (

the syntax is perfectly defined

only if you learn to solve equations a certain way. but with the pic I uploaded there is no ambiguity whatsoever. anyone on the planet could easily solve it

just saying "20/5(2*2)" is too ambiguous and undefined. it should be "(20/5)(2*2)" or "20/(5(2*2))" instead

You remind me of retarded teachers like in the OP.
Just stop wasting time in your posts and type it out like this PE(MD)(AS) so everyone can understand it. Quit being an over thinker and is why most teachers in 2025 are not qualified to teach anybody anything
If you or your offspring are not preparing for what is happening with the stonewalling free information then you just might deserve the future to come. There are two types of people in this world right now. People who own things, and those you pay to use things. That's it

Well it turns out math typically is based on facts, there's a reason why we had story problems.

There's many different acronyms for the correct order of operations BEDMAS/MiDAS, etc but the idea is that add/sub are the SAME operation and thus have the same weight, as well as mult/div are essentially the SAME operation. From what I can remember...it's standard to treat OP's example as an overall fraction, and thus complete the multiplication first and then the "fraction" as division. The correct answer can ONLY be "1".

That equation is NOT written 20/ 5 * (2 * 2) even though you want it to be.

It;s ALWAYS understood to be a multiplication between the 5 and the parentheses.....you don't need a multiplication sign to be there. That's basic algebra.

there is no ambiguity about OPs pic either. the order is defined. if you think there is another way you are no better than people who think 2+2=5

the extra multiplication symbol breaks it out of the divisor if explicitly stated, otherwise it's assumed to be part of the divisor and therefore 1

why is it invisible, who thought this was a good idea!?

the syntax is clear. the only way to get 1 would be if it was written 20 / (5(2*2))

Hahaha niggers are trying to rediefine math, physics and other science. Good luck

No wonder why Eastern European education is so valuable in the west. Russians are geniuses compared to what is happening in niggers lands

The debate is whether multiplication with a sign and multiplication without a sign are the same operation. I say they are not.

It's actually:
Parenthesis
Exponent/Root
Mult/Division
Addition/Substraction

The ones sharing a line have the same weight, in which case if you encounter both you operate from left to right.
There's also 2 divisions symbols: "/" and the deprecated "÷". If you encounter "÷" it means it's segmenting the whole operation so a+b ÷ c+d is equal to (a+b)/(c+d)

Moron.

And if you took linear algebra you would know that parenthesis suck in the number next to it UNLESS multiplication is explicitly written.

2(4) is not the same as 2 * (4)

You just want to be a retarded nigger inserting things that weren't written and of course bastardizing math by implying expressions can have multiple answers.

aka

tell me the answer of 2+2 and don't tell me 4

maybe harvard is not that hard

Parenthesis, Exponent, Division, Math, Addition, Subtraction

Math

Wait, isn't all of it Math?

I see the *, it's a multiplication.
You didn't understand what I wrote,
After you solve the brackets, you perform the equation left to right.

Don't get upset at me for trying to explain how the system works. Just keep the conversation friendly as I am NOT using language as a means to insult, hurt or tear you down.

I am a different person, treat me with the respect I treated you with.

2(4) is not the same as 2 * (4)

You couldn't possibly be this retarded?

2(4) is not the same as 2 * (4)

Ngmi. 2 is part of the parenthetical expression.
Never was or will be 16.

I knew you would take the bait because you're a faggot. They might have the same result but the precedence of operations are different. 2(4) is higher priority than 2 * (4) which simplifies to 2 * 4.

let x = 2*2
20 / 5 (2*2) = 20 / 5x
5x = 20
therefore 20 / 5x = 16

2(4) is not the same as 2 * (4)

Hey....how about 2 * 1(4), or 2 * 1 * (4) ?

in the context of being bound to the divisor it matters a lot

2(4) is a grouping. It thus takes priority in the PARENTHESIS part of PEMDAS.
2 * 4 is not the same priority..

find me a single programming language where the result is different than others. you cant. the math is done in a certain way and not the other because at some point humanity agreed it is done this way not another. the entire wold is build on top of this way and not another. but now we see some mentally ill faggots pushing its no this way but another. force that mindset into nasa and find out what will happen to all the satellites. there is absolutely no benefit for humanity to change this way into another. the only reason people would push for this shit is if they wanted to destroy the society. people who push this are absolute enemies of humanity

Why are Americans so fucking retarded?

Google who was the architect of Common core and laugh.

20 / 5 * 4 and not 20 / 5 (4) which is different

literally the same, hammed

But in the context of just 2(4) and 2 * (4) they are the same. 2(4) simplifies to 2*4

Order of operations is arbitrary, just use parentheses to avoid confusion. I this case using a fraction for the division could also help.

Look you retarded faggots, the equation is THIS...

20
____________
5 (2*2)

Holy fuck....it's NOT rocket science!

distributing into the parenthesis

you mean

20/5(2*2)

4(2*2)

(4*2)+(4*2)

8+8

16

Math

Retarded bogan nigger.

retards write shit in ambiguous ways

Both are completely wrong

Just leftists. The entire reason common core launched was to retain non-white attendance and piggyback them out of the lower school system.

Fpbp. New math, common core. These were done by design in an attempt to place white students on equal footing with black. Confused? Well, I’ll explain. These “educators” saw the little white kids getting help with their studies and homework from their parents. The little black bastards squirted out by high school drop out generational welfare whores had no dads and their moms were dumb as stumps. (Teachers were also tired of the white students coming to school the next day and asking questions they could not answer.) Ultimately it did not work. The educations of the white children suffered but they still scored significantly higher than the black. Our education system inadvertently provided compelling evidence to support the racial bellcurve IQ.

They might have the same answer but the order of priority of operations are different. 2(4) is actually (2 * 4) and not 2 * 4. If you took basic algebra you would know this and this is a requirement for basic equation solving such as 2(x+y) vs 2 * (x+y)

You wouldn't and CANNOT say 2(x + y) is the same as 2 * (x + y). And any curriculum that says 2(4) is the same as 2 * (4) is actually harming future math understanding.

You must do distribution. 2(x) is simplified to 2x (where x=4) and you must do it before you do anything else such as /. It fundamentally changes the solution and only people who want to make everyone winners want to create ambiguous math problems and as I mention, distribution IS a core algebra concept and it is going to be written 2(x+y) and simplified as 2x + 2y which is something you MUST do before division.

Parenthesis goes first, then you reduce the fraction.
Are you even 18 yet?

perfectly defined

a whole thread arguing

the syntax is fucking bullshit. old hack professor shit who don't understand UX.

it's the same reason we have a fucking greenwich meridian and assholes still using the imperial system.

the syntax is perfectly defined

Dumbass, a perfectly-defined syntax is impossible once operations beyond addition are introduced, see Gödel and Presburger. What you meant to say is that the syntax is adequate for the given expression. This is also false; the forward slash can be interpreted as either a vinculum (which yields a solution of one) or as an obelus (which yields a solution of 16). In the absence of further information as to which interpretation is intended, both answers are in fact equally correct.

assholes still using the imperial system.

You're welcome.

if I remove the context that the original passage was being used in the person I disagree with is wrong

This is why the department of education deserved to be obliterated, total nonsense
And as soon as that shit ended they started with black revisionism crt etc

The use of /, not ÷, indicates that it is a vinculum, not an obelus.

2(4) is actually (2 * 4) and not 2 * 4

2(4) is actually 2 * 1(4) which equals 2 * 4

Once again OP's equation is....

20
_________
5 (2*2) ...and thus the answer can only be 1.

Now kys....common core retard.

There is no debate, the rules were set up long ago. It's called multiplication by juxtaposition and it has priority.

If you understood what I wrote you would know I was saying the only possible answer is 1. Following distribution rules the OP is always

20 / 5 (2 * 2)

20 / 5 ( 4 )

20 / 20

1

I hope you die.

Any more controversial rage inducing shit like this?

Apparently they’re changing numath.
But why would you use parenthesis at all then? The whole point is to give it priority.

How the fuck would you get 1?

If you weren't a math flunkie you'd know about distribution.

How the fuck would you get 1?

The whole thing is a fraction....

20
____________
5 (2*2)

....thus the answer is, and can only be "1"

It’s 16.

afaik BIDMAS/BODMAS
Brackets
Indices/Other
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
>(2*2) = 4

20/5 = 4

4*4 = 16

fuck you and your cuck island, fix your problems and we will fix ours. you just train hop on what ever narrative your jew masters feed you. maybe next time you shouldn't give up your guns so easy when told to.

Not for some people
See Hence why people get different results

Gee anon what do you think 5(2) is? What do they call ( ) in Bongland?

How tf is it 1?

The correct answer is 0.2

In bongland it would be 10, we call () brackets not parenthesis

Patenthesis has priority. Not just what's in it, but what's attached to it.

20
____
5(2x2)

That would also be my default interpretation, but it is unfortunately necessary in this hellworld to accommodate the crudities of codemonkeys.

Gee anon so BRACKETS would mean you solve 5 (2 * 2) first. And you would know this because distribution is a concept.

That explains why I was confused, I'm a code money. The stupid bitch should have used the equation tool in powerpoint then

Retarded nigger. You clearly don't understand order of operations. 20/5 is not even relevant until you've solved for what's within parenthesis and once that is solved you still have to resolve the "(4)" still in parenthesis. That means you MUST multiply before your division to rid the operation of parenthesis.

20 / 5 (2 * 2) = ? Solve for parenthesis.
20 / 5 (4) = ? Parenthesis STILL take priority here.
20 / 20 = ? Simple division leaves you with "1" and the operation is complete.
1 = "1" A true equation is your result.

16 is just plain an impossibility if you solve as you're supposed to with PEMDAS/PEDMAS. The trick is that the ONLY times multiplication or division are interchangeable is when the operation within parenthesis dictates it or parenthesis are entirely absent from the total operation. You couldn't end up with 16 unless you completely ignore the order of operations by dividing without having resolved the parenthesis half of the operation first, as you did.

Amercians format their school sums differently apparently

PEMDAS is a mnemonic device, "Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sheboon," used to remember the order of operations in mathematics: Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication and Division (from left to right), and Addition and Subtraction (from left to right)

Here's a more detailed breakdown:

P: arentheses: Solve any expressions within parentheses first.
E: xponents: Next, address any exponents.
M: ultiplication and Division: Perform multiplication and division from left to right.
A: ddition and Subtraction: Finally, perform addition and subtraction from left to right.

This is why airplanes fall out of the fucking sky now.

If it was written as a fraction, the answer would be 1.
But it isn’t so the answer is 16.

he assumes the divisor

NGMI.
If it isn't explicit it doesn't exist.

another anon failed to resolve parenthesis before dividing

It's not resolved until you multiply (4) against the 5, which you have to do if adhering to order of operations.

No, you are wrong.
20/5(2*2)
Is not the same as
20
———
5(2*2)

They are two different expressions and are calculated differently.

Sure if you're ignoring operations to simplify an equation, this isn't calculus though and you aren't simplifying a fraction. Parenthesis takes precedence in the operation as a rule, else it wouldn't be there and it would be written as 20 / 5 * 22.

"22" was supposed to be written as 2 squared but Anon Babble apparently won't recognize exponents.

Both are technically correct. It all depends on some artificial rules that were created by people and not inherent to math. As long as they teach the accepted way, it’s not wrong to tell them that both answers are correct.

You are wrong, simple as. You can argue all you want.

ChatGPT, literally trained on woke common core retardation. Ask it about the rules of distribution.

It isn’t gpt

20 / 5 (4) = ? Parenthesis STILL take priority here.

Wrong. Parenthesis is solved. It's just multiplication now. And there's no reason to divide the 20 by 4.
You should see this as 20 * 0.2 * 4. Which is 16. If you were to divide the 20 by 4 as well, it would be included in another set of parentheses like so:
20/(5*(4*4)) or 20/(5*4*4).

Teacher is idiot, example is wrong. I am doing it the "old way" because I am old and I do math for a living.

All AIs are trained on retarded common core textbooks. Again, ask it about the rules of distribution. You MUST do distribution.

Wait so you can just reverse multiplication and division if you feel like it? I thought maths was precise and unfeeling.

20/5*(2*2)

20/5*4

4*4

16

() first.
Always from left to right. First */ than +-.
You from right to left sandniggers can fuck off.

1pbtid

stem nerd bait

there was never any good reason to share a country, a language, or the internet with pajeets

() first

ignores that 5(4) is a () pairing

completely makes up a * that wasn't already written

False. Nothing is "attached to parentheses", you are a retard.

You see it as
20/(5 (2*2))
Which it isn’t.

The proper answer is 1 you idiot

it is though. if there's no symbol in-between its (x)

All we heard about mutts is right. lmao

20 / 5 (4) = ? Parenthesis STILL take priority here.

lol, retard.

Btw programming a calculator is a nice exercise to get familiar with compiler programming.

Multiplication and division have the same "weight" so you solve them in the order you read in: left to right. The answer is 16, stupid browns

Multiplication and division are just inversions

2/4×5
2×0.25×5

Would you say the answer to the first one is 0.1 and the second is 2.5?

mutts when ambiguous syntax

i hope you all had yourselves you fucking kikes

equally correct

I believe they mean equityally correct.
But only 16 is mathematically correct.

You are mistaking resolution of an operation in parenthesis for multiplication, parenthesis don't just disappear once you've solve the operation contained in them. You have to rid the operation of parenthesis before proceeding to division even if it entails multiplying to do so. Don't rely on AI or random sites to explain what you don't know, a calculator will also give you the same answer you presented earlier because it's not limited by an order of operations. This is why common core should never be allowed.

rules of distribution

This is also incorrect since this isn't an equation requiring it, the only unknown variable here is the answer on the other end of the =.

The whole thing is NOT a fraction. If they wanted it to be a fraction it would be
20/(5(2*2))

its 16. anyone saying its 1 legitimately failed baby school math and that is scary as fuck to know.

american education is literally blacked.

multiplication is the white man of mathematics, it was ethnically replaced in it's native x homeland by the algebraic variable x and is now forced to settle for occupying * or sometimes even nothing at all

Ya buddy. As others have stated, we learned that 5(2x2) means that after you solve what's inside the brackets, you immediately must resolve what is touch those brackets next. Using PEMDAS, If it was written 20/5x(2x2) then the answer would be 16

You are a retarded nigger. 5(2*2) is not the same as (5(2*2))

Europa

USA is not in Europe.

You retarded nigger 5(2+2) is not 5 * (2+2). You learn this by learning distribution.

5(x + x) = (5x + 5x) = 10x

lol fuck denmark has retards too jesus christ

bomb earth please

You didn't learn that, you failed math and have been doing algebra wrong since. Attachment to parentheses does not exist, that is a retarded concept you or your woman teacher made up.

Here is material to learn. Hire a union member as a middleman to explain it to children. The middleman don't understand it without answer key. Get paid anyway. Just pass kids to next level so another union member can get their salary. Make sure to donate all dues to PACs so the one that gives steady raises gets in office.

yes but europe looks like that anyways

parenthesis don't just disappear once you've solve the operation contained in them

yes they do retardo. it becomes the equivalent of a multiplication sign.

I always learned BODMAS so 16 is correct

Your brain is fried from seed oils and high-fructose corn syrup.

(2*2)=4
Its not
(2*2)=(4)

Were you homeschooled perhaps?

x(

This is what is confusing them, they are simplifying and neglecting the process by ignoring that parenthesis persist even after they've solved the operation within them. This would leave them failing tests in our schools before common core took over.

You retarded nigger 5(2+2) is not 5 * (2+2). You learn this by learning distribution.

5(x + x) = (5x + 5x) = 10x

Shall I solve your other example?
5 * (2+2)
5* (x + x)
5x + 5x
10x.
Wow, would ya look at that. The same.

The problem as stated is ambiguous notation. You aren't smart for knowing which of these answers is correct, you're smart for knowing not to write expressions which don't have clear precedence.

Like there are genuinely some people who believe that "÷" and "/" have different meaning and different precedence. i.e.:

20 / 5 ( 2 * 2 )

has a different answer to

20 ÷ 5 ( 2 * 2)

*4

I've been seeing this image reposted for over 10 years
Get new material, Zhang

The function is the same, the order of operation is not. This is why you always failed in school.

Quit watching American fetish porn, it's not healthy for you. Nor does it reflect reality on a different continent.
We have our issues with immigration, but racemixing is not one of them.

You didn't put it in the comment and captcha fields retard

I bet you work at boeing :)

No, not homeschooled. This is how I was taught clear up to algebra and trigonometry.

You are a brown nigger kike golem who failed elementary math. If you mean (5(2*2)), then you write that, not 5(2*2). That just means 5*(2*2) without bloat.

I can't, the idea of having two hot chicks sucking my cock is strongly intricate inside my uncounciousness.

It’s you against 8 billion others. You are wrong, and there is no sense arguing.

You fucked up by doing 5*4 before 20/5.
Multiplication and division are on the same tier.

Love to see a nuclear physicist use 16 in the place of 1.

I think you just pissed off both sides, bravo.

I feel sorry for 8 million retards, I suppose. Being more numerous doesn't make them correct.

You wouldn't and CANNOT say 2(x + y) is the same as 2 * (x + y)

holy fucking retard. where did you learn this?

Oh, you said billion. That's clearly not the case though as this thread shows.

How do you 50 IQ niggers not get filtered by the captcha? Actual fucking downies in this thread, unironically.

lol. lmao. why are you lying? you live in norway too i know you are all taking niggers in massively as well. soon oslo will look like the cities of france and your women will become like the polish.

In the absence of explicit instructions as to whether to interpret the solidus as a vinculum or an obelus, the whole thing can in fact be interpreted as a fraction. You are assuming facts not in evidence. It's a mathematical expression, not calculator input.
If you'd gone any further than baby school math, you'd recognize this as an example of the importance of mathematical rigor.

Note how there is no division symbol in your standard key board? If you want to write what you're saying it means it's 5(2/4). An aspect of common core new math horseshit is misusing the division symbol before teaching the order of operations. Two numbers being depicted on one line with the division pictogram is wrong and your teacher back 20 years ago was supposed to stress that part and if not that at least get mad and impress upon you to write with proper notation once you got to that part of the textbook

You wouldn't and CANNOT say 2(x + y) is the same as 2 * (x + y)

Yes I can, and I do, because it's correct.

You must do distribution. 2(x) is simplified to 2x

Wrong again mulatto. 2x is a simplification of 2*x. You mutts are embarrassing. No wonder you haven't won a war in 80 years.

Some woman

lmao. you're a retarded nigger with a serious case of Dunning-Kruger.

You're both wrong. This is actually pointless nonsense and you will never encounter this in your entire life.

Fighting over pointless nonsense is core to the human experience.

Hold that cope close, maybe it'll keep you warm.

Wait, so is common core why the order of operations changed?

I thought there was another Mandella Effect psyop going on because I always see disagreements on basic algebra problems online now.
Who the fuck thought it was a good idea to randomly change how math works???

Like I said, we have issues with immigration. Primarily parallel societies, not mixing.
If you want to jerk off to niggers fucking white people, look to your south and yourself.

Wrong, it's explicit.
So you think 100 / 10 / 5 is interpreted as
100/(10/5)?
Kek

The whole thing is NOT a fraction. If they wanted it to be a fraction it would be

20/(5(2*2))

Jesus....I hope you niggers never get within a hundred miles of a nuclear power plant. Stick to the Walmart janitorial crew for God's sake!

I forgot to ask, do you think there's a difference between the meaning of these symbols, / and ÷ ? Because there's not.

do you really believe the next 30-40 years of europe is going to be mutt free? lol. the only difference is that youll have black and arab mutts while we have mutts of all flavours.

Hahahahaha funny you should mention that, I actually do go into nuke plants and the reason I can is because I learned algebra, calculus, diffeq, matrix algebra, stats, etc.

Oh there's the odd mutt around here and there but to claim it's an issue like with the mulatto farm to your south and yourself is just plain ignorant. Our issues will come in the form of cultural war between mudshits and native population.
They do not mix, they make parallel societies and bring their backwards shit with them.

im opening packs on masterduel trying to get the sky strikers going, im going to fight noobs with it. true

whites and blacks in america were separated once. were just farther down the pipeline than you. at some point europe is going to look like the usa whether it be 2085 or 2200 it will happen.

No you don't you LARPing faggot....you're an incel posting on Anon Babble

not a single reply mentioning that this is a years old photoshop

Notice all teachers are women now.

They're not imported farm equipment. That's the difference.
There will be war, but not your sexual fantasies.

and bringing in all that black and brown slave labour isnt? arabs in germany for example already see themselves as culturally german thoroughly.

Just stop, nigger. You've proven again and again that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
Go back to your jewish american blacked fantasies.

doesnt refute any of the arguments

youll have half arab grandchildren lmao

Yes, there is a difference between the obelus (÷), which is explicitly a linear operator, and the solidus (/), which is ambiguous; it can be interpreted either as a linear operator or as a linearization of a vinculum (a fraction bar). In the case of 100/10/5, the reiteration of the solidus provides context missing from the expression in the OP, making the former interpretation appear markedly more likely. In any event, if I were grading an assignment containing either expression, I'd give you a zero and tell you to either use LaTeX or write it out by hand next time.

Note how there is no division symbol in your standard key board?

?

Properly understanding the order of operations should be a criteria for who goes to the camps.

Lol nope, but I understand why you'd think that. I'd show you me and a fuel nozzle but Westinghouse would probably frown upon that.

Idiots cannot fathom that there is an ambiguity with operator precedence
A good teacher would explain that you should simply write the expression in a way that is unambiguous

/ does not imply () exist for the subsequent part of the equation. They are the same, it's not ambiguous. If you think it's ambiguous you learned incorrectly.

I am NOT using language

Yeah that's rich, coming from an Aussie cunt.

LMAO....you're probably not even 18. Fuck off, larpy.

The imperial system is superior in every way. The metric system was invented by faggots randomly choosing shit

You've already outed yourself as an engineer here . Real mathematicians take an entire semester course in mathematical rigor between the basic math courses you took and actual math, such as abstract algebra, real analysis, complex analysis, and topology. And that's just in undergrad; we have entire courses in operator theory in grad school. Oh, by the way, if you didn't prove the Central Limit Theorem in the first week of your stats class, it wasn't a real stats class.

i know youre baiting but no american actually likes imperial. youre just eternally coping with it.

(((post modernist))) subversion of academic institutions is absolutely shocking, and i can't even fathom how much damage it's doing to up and coming generations, and to future societies.
It's not "boomers" you absolute donkey...Boomers are utterly disgusted at this stuff.

? it's the reverse
People who only did high school math just plug through it from left to right, but people who did more complex math see the whole equation as one big fraction to be simplified , because those are so common in advanced maths

Checked. It was a misguided effort to smooth the transition from basic arithmetic to mathematics, where you will see use of derivative rules alongside the standard order of operations. PEMDAS/PEDMAS is just extremely simplified but in calculus the priority of parenthesis that we were taught to persist does not, this is what trips people up since our textbooks and teachers insisted the parenthesis persist after solving within. In reality instead of common core all they had to do was tell kids that as long as they solve what's in parenthesis first, they can solve the problem straight across without issue and change textbooks to reflect this but that isn't all common core did, it also introduced mathematics to kids before it was relevant to them. This led to the issue of multiple "correct" answers.

Double 18. You can think whatever you want buddy.

Kek lots of text and braggadocio but no explanation.

I give the demons permission to devour your soul.

no example

just cope for failing basic baby math

kek

WHAT ONE IS IT? WHICH WAY IS THE CORRECT FUCKING WAY?! I WAS TAUGHT PEMDAS NOW EVERY FUCKING SWINGING DICK IN THIS THREAD HAS THEIR OWN HOMEBREW ORDER OF OPERATIONS!! SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GIVE ME THE CORRECT ONE!

i don't care either way nigger, i'm an electrician. all i care about these days is not zapping things and torquing bolts meticulously

Something like 5(4) has an implicit * sign. It has the same precedence as * and / going left to right

Yah, materials engineer. Fun with statistical mechanics in electronic properties of materials coursework required some basic stats knowledge, so yeah modeling and analysis of uncertainty required proving the central limit theorum.

you're the one coping nigger. if you'd ever even used a spreadsheet program you'd know that. instead, you're here trying to regurgitate what some sheboon taught while looking like a complete fool.

These people need to be jailed or banished.

If your answer is anything but this, kill yourself.

I've never had a non-white teacher. Keep coping.

The actual reason is that the point of this level of math is assuring understanding of the process, and PEMDAS/BEDMAS are both processes used commonly in math.
Once you get into higher levels of math, the process used becomes significant, but at this point all that is being taught is understanding complex equations.
In these things, multiplication and division are made interchangeable which leads to confusion. Docking a kid points for not getting these intricacies is not valuable as it will only drive them away from truly learning it and the system itself is in a way that results in this confusion. For example, on how you arrive at these answers, the endpoint of the equation can be two things:

4 * 4 = 16

Or

20 / 20 = 1

These are both reasonable answers to arrive at that PEMDAS/BEDMAS both innately encourage through the interchanging of the MD/DM.

That's it.

Sorry, I'll try to use smaller words.

As an engineer, you are used to dealing with equations in a linear format (that is, written on a single line, not that the equations themselves are necessarily linear). In that format, you are absolutely correct, one would need to use parentheses to specify that what follows after the / character should be regarded as the denominator of a fraction.

People whose jobs are math, in contrast to people whose jobs simply use math, typically do not write equations in that linear format, although they are familiar with it. Such a person would look at the expression in the OP and see that it could very well be what you see it to be, an expression in linear format. However, it could also be an attempt at representing a fraction, using the / character to signify the fraction bar. This is common among people who haven't learned how to use LaTeX (a typesetting language used for representing mathematical equations) or the equation editor tools in their word processing software. The context of the OP (elementary school classroom) makes this a reasonable assumption, but by no means certain.

In the real world, one would simply ask the intended interpretation, but since we cannot do that here, the safest bet is to say that the expression is ambiguous, and provide both interpretations, along with their solutions.

dont be so closed minded op, only the patriarchy would force you to accept only one corret answer.

cocks gun

Always has been

typically do not write equations in that linear format

Correct. Neither would I, because people will make the error they are making all over this thread, even though they should not. Potential ambiguity is bad. If some large percent of people got confused and instead of PEMDAS, did EPMDAS. You wouldnt say that it's now ambiguous, because people are wrong, you'd say they're wrong, because they are. Which is what I'm doing. Yes it would still be helpful, if many get it wrong, to clarify that exponents aren't distributed to each component of what's in parentheses, but it's still wrong.
LaTeX syntax is irrelevant to this conversation. It's going to be different is LISP, for example. Lots of programs have different syntax.

20 ÷ 5(4) must be interpreted as (20 ÷ 5) × 4 = 16.
No "implied fraction" exists without parentheses or a stacked fraction bar.
If the writer meant 20 / (5(4)), they must write the brackets.
Sage

I was also confused by the claim 16 was the common core answer, it's just the correct one. 1 is incorrect.

Non-whites.

No, pemdas ranks multiplication/ div , add, and subtract the same, in which case its completed left to right.

and you've never done a lick of math beyond primary education. keep coping harder.

You are correct and nobody is saying it so I will.

That’s not a standard keyboard.
Tell me all these replies are trolls and this board isn’t filled with idiots of this magnitude

Parents were ignored or demonized when complaining about common core. Math is universal so every other country knew they were trying to dumb our kids down but leftists.

You can do it as right to left if that's easier for you, but it's not required if you just understand division IS multiplication, just of fractions/decimals e.g., 5/2 is actually 5 *(1/2) or 5 * 0.5
And that subtraction is just the addition of negative numbers. 5 - 2 is just 5 + (-1)

Based knowledge haver

Inb4.

LIGMA

I meant, left to right
And 5 + (-2)
My bad, I was driving and texting.

Potential ambiguity is bad.

Agreed.

If some large percent of people got confused and instead of PEMDAS, did EPMDAS. You wouldnt say that it's now ambiguous, because people are wrong, you'd say they're wrong, because they are. Which is what I'm doing.

The ambiguity in the expression in the OP isn't over order of operations, it's over what operation the / character represents. If it's interpreted as a fraction bar (vinculum), then the expression evaluates to 1 by following PEMDAS. If it's interpreted as a linear division operator (obelus), then the expression evaluates to 16 by following PEMDAS.

LaTeX syntax is irrelevant to this conversation.

I'm not talking about the syntax used by LaTeX, but the results produced by using it. It's a typesetting language, not a general-purpose programming language like LISP. All it does is make your writing look the way you want it to look, e.g., you can make a fraction look like a fraction in a textbook, with the numerator above the bar and the denominator beneath it.

Exactly. Coordinated against all our institutions and still going on.

Mathlet here. Is this it?

20/5(2*2)
20/5(4)
4(4)
16

You would get 1 only if it were written
20/(5(2*2))
right?

expression in the OP isn't over order of operations, it's over what operation the / character represents.

Surely you can generalize from my example. A mass misunderstanding does not mean a system is ambiguous and I'm not going to pretend it does.
I've used LaTeX bro.

On the contrary, as it stands, that parenthesis is implied. So the right way of reading it is:
(20)/(5(2 *2))
Because division separates terms.
To get what you want you need to implicitly write:
(20/5)(2*2)

That’s against alla standards, so no.

Division separates terms. It's 1.
You write:
20
----------- = 1
5 (2*2)

sweedish

bringing up allah standards

Like clockwork

This isn't even about math. Kids with an aptitude for mathematics will learn mathematics despite common core. It's about encouraging a subjective worldview that is accepting of alternate (incorrect)points of view. People weren't lying when they said that public schools are for brainwashing kids

Right, multiplication is just repeated addition

division IS multiplication

Be careful here. One tends to assume that if A is B, then B is also A. But, while all division operations for real numbers are equivalent to reciprocal multiplication, the inverse doesn't hold: there is no real divisor equivalent to multiplication by zero. (There are extensions to the reals which include one or more points at infinity, but these entail their own issues.)

No standard math rule adds "invisible parentheses" around 5(4). Division is left-associative, it binds to the next term only unless parentheses are used.
a / b × c always means (a / b) × c, not a / (b × c).
Show me one credible math source (ISO, AMS, IEEE, or a university textbook) that says Otherwise.

I thought subtraction, multiplication and division were just shortcuts for addition? Like

2-2 = 2+(-2)
2*3 = 2+2+2
10/2 = 2+2+2+2+2

How is division a shortcut for addition?

mathematical syntax is a mystery for americans

okay lets flex our first grade math children.

20/5(2*2)

first we solve the bracket

2*2=4

20/5(4)

20/5=4

4(4)

if no mathematical operation symbol is inbetween a bracket and another number, we automatically assume there is a multiplication.

4*4

the answer is 16.

a division sign is the EXACT SAME as a fraction sign. In ALL cases.

this means it is really:

20
____
5(2*2)

which is

20
____
20

which simplifies to

1
___
1

or just 1.

common core math, dude... common core

just

Incorrect. All iterated addition can be represented as multiplication, but the inverse is not true once variables are introduced. This is why Presburger arithmetic (only addition with nonnegative integers) is decidable whole Peano arithmetic (the same but also with multiplication) is not.

Gentlemen I prove to you that you're all retarded. Just did some back of the napkin math and clearly the answer is 1/5. If you prefer a floating point number that would be 0.20

mathworld.wolfram.com/Solidus.html

The diagonal slash "/" used as the bar between numerator and denominator of an in-line fraction (Bringhurst 1997, p. 284). The solidus is also called a diagonal.

Special care is needed when interpreting the meaning of a solidus in in-line math because of the notational ambiguity in expressions such as a/bc.

Learning the exceptions was never difficult, homework helped massively with this too as most people had parents in their household that were both around and capable enough to understand grade school math

1pid

1pid

1pid

1pid

1pid

You are all niggers and bots bumping a garbage b8 thread.

CGI much? It is 16 you morchandi!

20÷5 = 4
X
2x2 = 4
Thus
4x4 = 16

Simple as!

taken literally or evaluated in a symbolic mathematics languages such as the Wolfram Language, it means (a/b)×c. For clarity, parentheses should therefore always be used when delineating compound denominators.

For clarity, parentheses should therefore always be used when delineating compound denominators.

parentheses should therefore always be used

Your source sides with me.

You can't get an 'is' from an 'ought'. The source makes an 'ought' claim, one I've already agreed with. Doesn't change the 'is'.

if you actually want the real answer to why there is a difference, its because the syntax is ambiguous and there are 2 different conventions used depending on which brand of calculator you buy. see the eevblog if you want the full explanation...but you don't, youre just trolling.

Reading left to right is a convention, but making a text unclear is the real error. Type clearly so readers are not confused or risk computing wrong on some code

case in point - american 1pbtid OP posts Anon Babble thread on Anon Babble.
hundreds of americans reply and bump the thread.
dumbfuck normie newfags totally ruined this board