Daughter's math homework (2 Viewers)

[Kleck]

I'm not alone in this concept. Ninjas kick ###.

LINK

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Thread title "I beleive the teacher is wrong", shick agreed with the teacher, by the distributive property, the original poster probably thought shick was wrong too for a while, along with others.

Yes, there were (and still are?) a few people saying that -5^2=-25 is wrong.Smoo wasn't, though. He was just saying it's stupid. Not that the people who follow the convention are stupid, but that the convention itself is stupid.

We've talked him down from stupid to arbitrary, I think. (I would keep going past arbitrary all the way to sensible.)

 

[FatMax]

I think you're taking this a mite personally.

Of course I am. This is my livelihood. Its what I do for a living. There are folks in this thread telling me that I'm flat our wrong. That bothers me. Might as well start arguing about the earth being round.Again, there's not right or wrong in this. Its a translation of symbols into meaning. It just is.

No, they weren't telling you that you were wrong. They were telling you that they believed that the convention which you were correctly following was ill-conceived.Big difference.

Also, he never took you up on your man-hug offer.

 

[rolyaTy]

Every math equation has as its foundation some predetermined spatial world and some predetermined origin, regardless of the number of variables, or in other words, the number of dimensions. Let's assume we're talking about a 2-dimensional world, since this is the most commonly encountered in high school algebra. We set 'up' on the y-axis and 'right' on the x-axis as going forward, or as positive numbers. In the problem being discussed there is only one dimension, and thus, a number line, but this really does matter. The same convention apply, except there is only one axis. From here, everything we do is relative to this origin and the conventions we set for it. Therefore, only whole numbers actually exist on their own. Without the conventions set by the x- and y-axis, it would be impossible to define a negative number. Negative numbers exist only because we need them to be able to communicate mathematically, or in other words, as Royalty (spelling, sorry) has been trying to tell you all, to specify a direction in space relative to our conventions.

This may be confusing, as it is much more difficult to express mathematical thoughts in words than I thought it would be when I began this post, and and had I realized that to begin with, I probably would not have bothered.

Exactly. Math is the progression of a pencil tip across a number line, with the tip starting at the origin of 0, and proceeding according to the rules of math along the number line, specific magnitudes at each step. The negative sign controls what direction the tip moves in, and the magnitude of the numbers controls how far the tip moves. THe operators control how many times the tip moves. (I didn't try to find flaws in this, so there probably are some, but the underlying point remains).Vector math is the same progression, but in 2 dimensions or more and (for 2-d vectors) consists of 2, one-dimensional vectors in the x and y direction.

 

[Kleck]

I think you're taking this a mite personally.

Of course I am. This is my livelihood. Its what I do for a living. There are folks in this thread telling me that I'm flat our wrong. That bothers me. Might as well start arguing about the earth being round.Again, there's not right or wrong in this. Its a translation of symbols into meaning. It just is.

No, they weren't telling you that you were wrong. They were telling you that they believed that the convention which you were correctly following was ill-conceived.Big difference.

Ill conceived? Nothing was "conceived". There simply has to be an established rule for interpreting the symbols. Something we can all agree on. No one is saying its a good way to write it. I'm just telling you how the mathematical world chooses to view the symbols. Nothing else.

 

[Smoo]

I think you're taking this a mite personally.

Of course I am. This is my livelihood. Its what I do for a living. There are folks in this thread telling me that I'm flat our wrong. That bothers me. Might as well start arguing about the earth being round.Again, there's not right or wrong in this. Its a translation of symbols into meaning. It just is.

No, they weren't telling you that you were wrong. They were telling you that they believed that the convention which you were correctly following was ill-conceived.Big difference.

Ill conceived? Nothing was "conceived". There simply has to be an established rule for interpreting the symbols. Something we can all agree on. No one is saying its a good way to write it. I'm just telling you how the mathematical world chooses to view the symbols. Nothing else.

Yes, and I believed that the chosen way had some serious problems with it when thought out logically. I no longer believe that, but I do think the decision isn't any better than my way. It just isn't any worse either.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Ill conceived? Nothing was "conceived". There simply has to be an established rule for interpreting the symbols. Something we can all agree on. No one is saying its a good way to write it. I'm just telling you how the mathematical world chooses to view the symbols. Nothing else.

But not all conventions are neutral. Some are either wise or stupid.For example, when we see the number 29162, we interpret the right-most digit as ones place, the digit immediately to its left as the tens place, the digit immediately to its left as the hundreds place, and so on.

A different convention could have been chosen. We could have said that the middle digit (or, if there are an even number, the digit to the right of the middle gap) is the ones place and gotten goofier from there.

That would be a convention. It would be "just the way it is." But it would be stupid.

Smoo felt the same way about considering the unary minus to be an operator. He recognized it as standard convention, but argued that it was stupid.

Smoo was wrong because that particular convention actually isn't stupid (IMO) -- not because it's impossible for any conventions to be stupid.

 

[Clayton Gray]

-5 is the opposite of 5, but that's a static definition that's really without meaning in a math equation.  An equation is a process (like a journey, with the distance between the start and end as the final answer), and a static definition doesn't help understand the process, that is why the concept that "negative" means "the opposite of" doesn't appeal to me. To me, the negative sign represents action, and it specifies direction. 

All math boils down to the distance from the origin to the final point of the equation, even vector math in 3 dimensions.  The players in the equation are operators and magnitudes.  Operators are x(times), -(minus), +(plus)...etc and get more and more advanced the further you go in math, but the basics still apply.  Magnitudes are units such as five, six, eighty, etc. 

All that math equations do is tell you how to proceed on a number line.  The magnitudes tell you how far to go, the neg/pos signs tell you direction, and the other signs tell you how to deal with more than 1 number, or what operations to perform on them.

So in 2+(-2) you might know that -2 is the opposite of 2, but that doesn't tell you how to solve the problem.  To solve the problem, you must reconcile the operators, use the magnitudes, and find the distance the equation takes you from the origin.  That is why negative signs make the most sense being defined as a reversal of direction, rather than the "opposite" of a number.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see a big difference between reversal and opposite.

It makes no difference to us because we know what happens when -2 and 2 are combined. But try teaching that to someone who doesn't know what math is, and explain to them how the - sign means "the opposite", and whether or not that helps them come to the correct answer. You may be successful, but I can't figure a way to explain that without simply telling them that it is true that a number plus it's opposite equals zero...rather than showing them it is, using my explanation.

We used two-sided disks (red and yellow). The yellow side was positive and the red was negative. A positive and a negative cancel each other.4 + (-7) is -3 because the four positives are canceled by four of the negatives which leaves three remaining negatives.

But why are the positives canceled by the negatives? That's still a definition learned, that 1 positive cancels 1 negative. Why is that true?

No one has ever asked. Seems pretty logical.

 

[Kleck]

Smoo was wrong because that particular convention actually isn't stupid (IMO) -- not because it's impossible for any conventions to be stupid.

I can agree with that.Helpful link

 

[Clayton Gray]

Or is it just Carlton and Shick just sending porn links back and forth?

I wish.

PM sent.

Too bad Chase didn't specifiy "good" porn. :(

 

[Kleck]

Another helpful link

 

[rolyaTy]

I think you're taking this a mite personally.

Of course I am. This is my livelihood. Its what I do for a living. There are folks in this thread telling me that I'm flat our wrong. That bothers me. Might as well start arguing about the earth being round.Again, there's not right or wrong in this. Its a translation of symbols into meaning. It just is.

No, they weren't telling you that you were wrong. They were telling you that they believed that the convention which you were correctly following was ill-conceived.Big difference.

Ill conceived? Nothing was "conceived". There simply has to be an established rule for interpreting the symbols. Something we can all agree on. No one is saying its a good way to write it. I'm just telling you how the mathematical world chooses to view the symbols. Nothing else.

Lets say you have this equation: 3+5^2.5^2 is shorthand for 5*5 so you substitute taht in and get 3+5*5. 5*5 is shorthand for (5+5+5+5+5), so you substitute that in. Then you have 3+(5+5+5+5+5). Using the identities, you can solve that any way you want.

The problem comes in when you are just working with 3+5^2 though, as to what order that should be done, because we use that terminology for shorthand, and we don't want to have to expand it each time to find out the correct answer. So it turns out that you have to do the exponent first, before you do addition...possibly because it's the highest order of shorthand?

So maybe you have -5^2 and some think that it means (-5)^2. Well, by the rules of the shorthand set up by whoever developed the ^ thing, they say that if you want to shorten (-5+-5+-5+-5+-5) you have to write (-5)(5) and that shortens to (-1*5)^2.

 

[tommyboy]

Thread title "I beleive the teacher is wrong", shick agreed with the teacher, by the distributive property, the original poster probably thought shick was wrong too for a while, along with others.

Yes, there were (and still are?) a few people saying that -5^2=-25 is wrong.Smoo wasn't, though. He was just saying it's stupid. Not that the people who follow the convention are stupid, but that the convention itself is stupid.

We've talked him down from stupid to arbitrary, I think. (I would keep going past arbitrary all the way to sensible.)

Squaring Negative Numbers

Date: 02/19/2002 at 10:59:10

From: Thanh Phan

Subject: Squaring negative numbers

Hello,

I would like to know: does -9^2 = 81 or -81?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 02/19/2002 at 12:38:08

From: Doctor Rick

Subject: Re: Squaring negative numbers

Hi, Thanh.

You really should be precise about what you are asking in this case,

since (-9)^2 means -9 times -9, but the expression -9^2 could also be

taken to mean -(9^2), that is, the negative of the square of 9, which

is -81.

When we're working with variables, if we see -x^2, we interpret it in

the second way, as -(x^2), because squaring (or any exponentiation)

takes precedence over negation (or any multiplication; -x is treated

as -1*x.

When you have numbers only, as in -9^2, it's not at all clear that we

should treat it differently from -x^2. However, some will argue that

it should, because -9 represents a single number, not an operation on

a number. Thus, some will interpret -9^2 as (-9)^2, while others will

read it as -(9^2).

Because of the difference of opinion, I highly recommend that you put

in the parentheses explicitly whenever this situation arises.

- Doctor Rick, The Math Forum

http://mathforum.org/dr.math/

 

[Smoo]

-5 is the opposite of 5, but that's a static definition that's really without meaning in a math equation. An equation is a process (like a journey, with the distance between the start and end as the final answer), and a static definition doesn't help understand the process, that is why the concept that "negative" means "the opposite of" doesn't appeal to me. To me, the negative sign represents action, and it specifies direction.

All math boils down to the distance from the origin to the final point of the equation, even vector math in 3 dimensions. The players in the equation are operators and magnitudes. Operators are x(times), -(minus), +(plus)...etc and get more and more advanced the further you go in math, but the basics still apply. Magnitudes are units such as five, six, eighty, etc.

All that math equations do is tell you how to proceed on a number line. The magnitudes tell you how far to go, the neg/pos signs tell you direction, and the other signs tell you how to deal with more than 1 number, or what operations to perform on them.

So in 2+(-2) you might know that -2 is the opposite of 2, but that doesn't tell you how to solve the problem. To solve the problem, you must reconcile the operators, use the magnitudes, and find the distance the equation takes you from the origin. That is why negative signs make the most sense being defined as a reversal of direction, rather than the "opposite" of a number.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see a big difference between reversal and opposite.

It makes no difference to us because we know what happens when -2 and 2 are combined. But try teaching that to someone who doesn't know what math is, and explain to them how the - sign means "the opposite", and whether or not that helps them come to the correct answer. You may be successful, but I can't figure a way to explain that without simply telling them that it is true that a number plus it's opposite equals zero...rather than showing them it is, using my explanation.

We used two-sided disks (red and yellow). The yellow side was positive and the red was negative. A positive and a negative cancel each other.4 + (-7) is -3 because the four positives are canceled by four of the negatives which leaves three remaining negatives.

But why are the positives canceled by the negatives? That's still a definition learned, that 1 positive cancels 1 negative. Why is that true?

No one has ever asked. Seems pretty logical.

Roly's number line model explains it well. If you take one step forward and then an equal steop backwards, you are right back where you started. You have used up both actions and not changed your position. Their effects have cancelled each other.

 

[rolyaTy]

-5 is the opposite of 5, but that's a static definition that's really without meaning in a math equation. An equation is a process (like a journey, with the distance between the start and end as the final answer), and a static definition doesn't help understand the process, that is why the concept that "negative" means "the opposite of" doesn't appeal to me. To me, the negative sign represents action, and it specifies direction.

All math boils down to the distance from the origin to the final point of the equation, even vector math in 3 dimensions. The players in the equation are operators and magnitudes. Operators are x(times), -(minus), +(plus)...etc and get more and more advanced the further you go in math, but the basics still apply. Magnitudes are units such as five, six, eighty, etc.

All that math equations do is tell you how to proceed on a number line. The magnitudes tell you how far to go, the neg/pos signs tell you direction, and the other signs tell you how to deal with more than 1 number, or what operations to perform on them.

So in 2+(-2) you might know that -2 is the opposite of 2, but that doesn't tell you how to solve the problem. To solve the problem, you must reconcile the operators, use the magnitudes, and find the distance the equation takes you from the origin. That is why negative signs make the most sense being defined as a reversal of direction, rather than the "opposite" of a number.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see a big difference between reversal and opposite.

It makes no difference to us because we know what happens when -2 and 2 are combined. But try teaching that to someone who doesn't know what math is, and explain to them how the - sign means "the opposite", and whether or not that helps them come to the correct answer. You may be successful, but I can't figure a way to explain that without simply telling them that it is true that a number plus it's opposite equals zero...rather than showing them it is, using my explanation.

We used two-sided disks (red and yellow). The yellow side was positive and the red was negative. A positive and a negative cancel each other.4 + (-7) is -3 because the four positives are canceled by four of the negatives which leaves three remaining negatives.

But why are the positives canceled by the negatives? That's still a definition learned, that 1 positive cancels 1 negative. Why is that true?

No one has ever asked. Seems pretty logical.

I dunno how much logic there is in a definition, because that's just a definition if it's not explained how that is.

 

[rolyaTy]

Roly's number line model explains it well. If you take one step forward and then an equal steop backwards, you are right back where you started. You have used up both actions and not changed your position. Their effects have cancelled each other.

The number line method has the additional benefit of translating directly into vector math, once the concept that the solution to math problems is really the distance from the origin to the endpoint.I'm sure when y'all teach trig, you have them draw the vectors on an x-y grid, and start from the head of the vectors you're adding (head to tail) to the end of the last vector the draw, and that results in the answer of what the vectors added is. Right?

 

[Clayton Gray]

Thread title "I beleive the teacher is wrong", shick agreed with the teacher, by the distributive property, the original poster probably thought shick was wrong too for a while, along with others.

Yes, there were (and still are?) a few people saying that -5^2=-25 is wrong.Smoo wasn't, though. He was just saying it's stupid. Not that the people who follow the convention are stupid, but that the convention itself is stupid.

We've talked him down from stupid to arbitrary, I think. (I would keep going past arbitrary all the way to sensible.)

Squaring Negative Numbers

Date: 02/19/2002 at 10:59:10

From: Thanh Phan

Subject: Squaring negative numbers

Hello,

I would like to know: does -9^2 = 81 or -81?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 02/19/2002 at 12:38:08

From: Doctor Rick

Subject: Re: Squaring negative numbers

Hi, Thanh.

You really should be precise about what you are asking in this case,

since  (-9)^2 means -9 times -9, but the expression -9^2 could also be

taken to mean -(9^2), that is, the negative of the square of 9, which

is -81.

When we're working with variables, if we see -x^2, we interpret it in

the second way, as -(x^2), because squaring (or any exponentiation)

takes precedence over negation (or any multiplication; -x is treated

as -1*x.

When you have numbers only, as in -9^2, it's not at all clear that we

should treat it differently from -x^2. However, some will argue that

it should, because -9 represents a single number, not an operation on

a number. Thus, some will interpret -9^2 as (-9)^2, while others will

read it as -(9^2).

Because of the difference of opinion, I highly recommend that you put

in the parentheses explicitly whenever this situation arises.

- Doctor Rick, The Math Forum

  http://mathforum.org/dr.math/ 

Dr. Rick needs more schooling.

 

[Clayton Gray]

-5 is the opposite of 5, but that's a static definition that's really without meaning in a math equation.  An equation is a process (like a journey, with the distance between the start and end as the final answer), and a static definition doesn't help understand the process, that is why the concept that "negative" means "the opposite of" doesn't appeal to me. To me, the negative sign represents action, and it specifies direction. 

All math boils down to the distance from the origin to the final point of the equation, even vector math in 3 dimensions.  The players in the equation are operators and magnitudes.  Operators are x(times), -(minus), +(plus)...etc and get more and more advanced the further you go in math, but the basics still apply.  Magnitudes are units such as five, six, eighty, etc. 

All that math equations do is tell you how to proceed on a number line.  The magnitudes tell you how far to go, the neg/pos signs tell you direction, and the other signs tell you how to deal with more than 1 number, or what operations to perform on them.

So in 2+(-2) you might know that -2 is the opposite of 2, but that doesn't tell you how to solve the problem.  To solve the problem, you must reconcile the operators, use the magnitudes, and find the distance the equation takes you from the origin.  That is why negative signs make the most sense being defined as a reversal of direction, rather than the "opposite" of a number.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see a big difference between reversal and opposite.

It makes no difference to us because we know what happens when -2 and 2 are combined. But try teaching that to someone who doesn't know what math is, and explain to them how the - sign means "the opposite", and whether or not that helps them come to the correct answer. You may be successful, but I can't figure a way to explain that without simply telling them that it is true that a number plus it's opposite equals zero...rather than showing them it is, using my explanation.

We used two-sided disks (red and yellow). The yellow side was positive and the red was negative. A positive and a negative cancel each other.4 + (-7) is -3 because the four positives are canceled by four of the negatives which leaves three remaining negatives.

But why are the positives canceled by the negatives? That's still a definition learned, that 1 positive cancels 1 negative. Why is that true?

No one has ever asked. Seems pretty logical.

Roly's number line model explains it well. If you take one step forward and then an equal steop backwards, you are right back where you started. You have used up both actions and not changed your position. Their effects have cancelled each other.

I know that, and now that I think about it, I have moved my body forward and backwards to simulate the positive and negative movement.

 

[Clayton Gray]

-5 is the opposite of 5, but that's a static definition that's really without meaning in a math equation.  An equation is a process (like a journey, with the distance between the start and end as the final answer), and a static definition doesn't help understand the process, that is why the concept that "negative" means "the opposite of" doesn't appeal to me. To me, the negative sign represents action, and it specifies direction. 

All math boils down to the distance from the origin to the final point of the equation, even vector math in 3 dimensions.  The players in the equation are operators and magnitudes.  Operators are x(times), -(minus), +(plus)...etc and get more and more advanced the further you go in math, but the basics still apply.  Magnitudes are units such as five, six, eighty, etc. 

All that math equations do is tell you how to proceed on a number line.  The magnitudes tell you how far to go, the neg/pos signs tell you direction, and the other signs tell you how to deal with more than 1 number, or what operations to perform on them.

So in 2+(-2) you might know that -2 is the opposite of 2, but that doesn't tell you how to solve the problem.  To solve the problem, you must reconcile the operators, use the magnitudes, and find the distance the equation takes you from the origin.  That is why negative signs make the most sense being defined as a reversal of direction, rather than the "opposite" of a number.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see a big difference between reversal and opposite.

It makes no difference to us because we know what happens when -2 and 2 are combined. But try teaching that to someone who doesn't know what math is, and explain to them how the - sign means "the opposite", and whether or not that helps them come to the correct answer. You may be successful, but I can't figure a way to explain that without simply telling them that it is true that a number plus it's opposite equals zero...rather than showing them it is, using my explanation.

We used two-sided disks (red and yellow). The yellow side was positive and the red was negative. A positive and a negative cancel each other.4 + (-7) is -3 because the four positives are canceled by four of the negatives which leaves three remaining negatives.

But why are the positives canceled by the negatives? That's still a definition learned, that 1 positive cancels 1 negative. Why is that true?

No one has ever asked. Seems pretty logical.

I dunno how much logic there is in a definition, because that's just a definition if it's not explained how that is.

How can it not be logical that one positive and one negative would cancel each other?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I just posted this question at 2+2.

Nobody from here is allowed to post in that thread. Let's just see what happens.

There are lots of math guys over there.

 

[tommyboy]

what would the answer be here:X^(-5^2) if X= -5

 

[tommyboy]

Thread title "I beleive the teacher is wrong", shick agreed with the teacher, by the distributive property, the original poster probably thought shick was wrong too for a while, along with others.

Yes, there were (and still are?) a few people saying that -5^2=-25 is wrong.Smoo wasn't, though. He was just saying it's stupid. Not that the people who follow the convention are stupid, but that the convention itself is stupid.

We've talked him down from stupid to arbitrary, I think. (I would keep going past arbitrary all the way to sensible.)

Squaring Negative Numbers

Date: 02/19/2002 at 10:59:10

From: Thanh Phan

Subject: Squaring negative numbers

Hello,

I would like to know: does -9^2 = 81 or -81?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 02/19/2002 at 12:38:08

From: Doctor Rick

Subject: Re: Squaring negative numbers

Hi, Thanh.

You really should be precise about what you are asking in this case,

since  (-9)^2 means -9 times -9, but the expression -9^2 could also be

taken to mean -(9^2), that is, the negative of the square of 9, which

is -81.

When we're working with variables, if we see -x^2, we interpret it in

the second way, as -(x^2), because squaring (or any exponentiation)

takes precedence over negation (or any multiplication; -x is treated

as -1*x.

When you have numbers only, as in -9^2, it's not at all clear that we

should treat it differently from -x^2. However, some will argue that

it should, because -9 represents a single number, not an operation on

a number. Thus, some will interpret -9^2 as (-9)^2, while others will

read it as -(9^2).

Because of the difference of opinion, I highly recommend that you put

in the parentheses explicitly whenever this situation arises.

- Doctor Rick, The Math Forum

  http://mathforum.org/dr.math/  

Dr. Rick needs more schooling.

 

[Smoo]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if X= -5

According to convention:-3.3554432 × 10^(-18)

 

[Clayton Gray]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if X= -5

approx. 1/298,023,000,000,000,000

 

[Clayton Gray]

Thread title "I beleive the teacher is wrong", shick agreed with the teacher, by the distributive property, the original poster probably thought shick was wrong too for a while, along with others.

Yes, there were (and still are?) a few people saying that -5^2=-25 is wrong.Smoo wasn't, though. He was just saying it's stupid. Not that the people who follow the convention are stupid, but that the convention itself is stupid.

We've talked him down from stupid to arbitrary, I think. (I would keep going past arbitrary all the way to sensible.)

Squaring Negative Numbers

Date: 02/19/2002 at 10:59:10

From: Thanh Phan

Subject: Squaring negative numbers

Hello,

I would like to know: does -9^2 = 81 or -81?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 02/19/2002 at 12:38:08

From: Doctor Rick

Subject: Re: Squaring negative numbers

Hi, Thanh.

You really should be precise about what you are asking in this case,

since  (-9)^2 means -9 times -9, but the expression -9^2 could also be

taken to mean -(9^2), that is, the negative of the square of 9, which

is -81.

When we're working with variables, if we see -x^2, we interpret it in

the second way, as -(x^2), because squaring (or any exponentiation)

takes precedence over negation (or any multiplication; -x is treated

as -1*x.

When you have numbers only, as in -9^2, it's not at all clear that we

should treat it differently from -x^2. However, some will argue that

it should, because -9 represents a single number, not an operation on

a number. Thus, some will interpret -9^2 as (-9)^2, while others will

read it as -(9^2).

Because of the difference of opinion, I highly recommend that you put

in the parentheses explicitly whenever this situation arises.

- Doctor Rick, The Math Forum

  http://mathforum.org/dr.math/  

Dr. Rick needs more schooling.

Sorry but when someone that supposedly has a doctoral in math begins his answer with "You really should be precise" I'm out. The question is precise to anyone that understands convention.

 

[Clayton Gray]

I just posted this question at 2+2.

Nobody from here is allowed to post in that thread. Let's just see what happens.

There are lots of math guys over there.

over there.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if X= -5

(-5)^(-25)

 

[thatguy]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

By the time this thing is done, we may see a version of this thread in thousands of forums throughout the internet

 

[Clayton Gray]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

It should be pinned as a reminder of the perils of considering something to be simple.

 

[Bevo]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

 

[thatguy]

Is this thread finally going to die?  We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

Uh, no. Someone forcing you to keep that stick up your ###? Lighten up.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

It should be pinned as a reminder of the perils of considering something to be simple.

You sound like my law professors.

 

[Bevo]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

Uh, no. Someone forcing you to keep that stick up your ###? Lighten up.

Seems to me that you are the one with the stick up tour ###. Look back up there a few posts and see who was wanting the thread to die. I would suggest that you should lighten up, but you obviously have some severe mental issues that would not allow it.

 

[tommyboy]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if X= -5

(-5)^(-25)

not according to what you guys have been arguing.if you replace x with -5 then the equation looks like this:

-5^-25

which based on what Gray and Shick and yourself were saying would be

the same as -(5^-25) not (-5)^(-25)

 

[thatguy]

Is this thread finally going to die?  We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

Uh, no. Someone forcing you to keep that stick up your ###? Lighten up.

Seems to me that you are the one with the stick up tour ###. Look back up there a few posts and see who was wanting the thread to die. I would suggest that you should lighten up, but you obviously have some severe mental issues that would not allow it.

Yeah, man, I was messing around. Sarcasm isn't the right word, but it's the first one that comes to mind. My advice to you is to not take yourself, or anyone else for that matter, so seriously (read: take the stick out of your ###).

 

[Bevo]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

Uh, no. Someone forcing you to keep that stick up your ###? Lighten up.

Seems to me that you are the one with the stick up tour ###. Look back up there a few posts and see who was wanting the thread to die. I would suggest that you should lighten up, but you obviously have some severe mental issues that would not allow it.

Yeah, man, I was messing around. Sarcasm isn't the right word, but it's the first one that comes to mind. My advice to you is to not take yourself, or anyone else for that matter, so seriously (read: take the stick out of your ###).

As was I (at least the on the 1st one). Now, take that stick out of you mout... uh, ###!

 

[thatguy]

Is this thread finally going to die?  We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

Uh, no. Someone forcing you to keep that stick up your ###? Lighten up.

Seems to me that you are the one with the stick up tour ###. Look back up there a few posts and see who was wanting the thread to die. I would suggest that you should lighten up, but you obviously have some severe mental issues that would not allow it.

Yeah, man, I was messing around. Sarcasm isn't the right word, but it's the first one that comes to mind. My advice to you is to not take yourself, or anyone else for that matter, so seriously (read: take the stick out of your ###).

As was I (at least the on the 1st one). Now, take that stick out of you mout... uh, ###!

Well, okay, it's settled then. We are both sarcastic #######s. Carry on.

 

[Bevo]

Is this thread finally going to die? We can only hope.

Someone forcing you to read it?

Uh, no. Someone forcing you to keep that stick up your ###? Lighten up.

Seems to me that you are the one with the stick up tour ###. Look back up there a few posts and see who was wanting the thread to die. I would suggest that you should lighten up, but you obviously have some severe mental issues that would not allow it.

Yeah, man, I was messing around. Sarcasm isn't the right word, but it's the first one that comes to mind. My advice to you is to not take yourself, or anyone else for that matter, so seriously (read: take the stick out of your ###).

As was I (at least the on the 1st one). Now, take that stick out of you mout... uh, ###!

Well, okay, it's settled then. We are both sarcastic #######s. Carry on.

 

[Mjolnirs]

The "-" you are referring to in your reply is commonly called a "subtraction" sign. By definition, subtracting is merely "adding the opposite". In your "3 - 2" example, we can rewrite it as "3 + (-2)" which can be read as "three plus negative two" or "three plus the opposite of two".

So when earlier it was said that we should assume-5^2 = (-1)(5)^2 and to get there we could think of it as

0-5^2 then we can do this

0+(-5)^2 which brings us back to

25



Skipping from page 27 to 33 (so if this has been mentioned, sorry)

 

[chet]

I just posted this question at 2+2.

Nobody from here is allowed to post in that thread. Let's just see what happens.

There are lots of math guys over there.

We're not allowed?

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

I just posted this question at 2+2.

Nobody from here is allowed to post in that thread. Let's just see what happens.

There are lots of math guys over there.

We're not allowed?

What is the proper contraction here for "We are not allowed?"1) We're not allowed

2) We aren't allowed

3) either

4) depends on where you want emphasis



Paging Smoo

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if X= -5

(-5)^(-25)

not according to what you guys have been arguing.if you replace x with -5 then the equation looks like this:

-5^-25

which based on what Gray and Shick and yourself were saying would be

the same as -(5^-25) not (-5)^(-25)

No, this is very wrong.x is negative five. If you square negative five, you get 25.

x^2 = therefore equals 25 where x = -5. When you substitute the -5 in for x, it would read: (-5)^2. You have to put the parentheses around the -5 to indicate that the -5 (i.e., x) is what you're squaring.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I just posted this question at 2+2.

Nobody from here is allowed to post in that thread. Let's just see what happens.

There are lots of math guys over there.

We're not allowed?

LOL. Obviously you can do whatever you want. I just figured it'd be more interesting to see their arguments rather than our own (again).

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if X= -5

(-5)^(-25)

not according to what you guys have been arguing.if you replace x with -5 then the equation looks like this:

-5^-25

which based on what Gray and Shick and yourself were saying would be

the same as -(5^-25) not (-5)^(-25)

By the way, you seem to be making the mistake of confusing the value -5 with the expression "-5".The value of x is -5.

If you want to square the value -5, you have to write it as "(-5)^2". So the expression of x would, in that case, not be "-5" but "(-5)".

 

[Aussie Cowboy]

Is this thread seriously 37 pages long?

Has anyone read this?

Or is it just Carlton and Shick just sending porn Math Ninja links back and forth?

FIXED

 

[rolyaTy]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if  X= -5

(-5)^(-25)

not according to what you guys have been arguing.if you replace x with -5 then the equation looks like this:

-5^-25

which based on what Gray and Shick and yourself were saying would be

the same as -(5^-25) not (-5)^(-25)

According to what we've been arguing, MT is right.

 

[rolyaTy]

what would the answer be here:

X^(-5^2) if  X= -5

(-5)^(-25)

not according to what you guys have been arguing.if you replace x with -5 then the equation looks like this:

-5^-25

which based on what Gray and Shick and yourself were saying would be

the same as -(5^-25) not (-5)^(-25)

By the way, you seem to be making the mistake of confusing the value -5 with the expression "-5".The value of x is -5.

If you want to square the value -5, you have to write it as "(-5)^2". So the expression of x would, in that case, not be "-5" but "(-5)".

Tha'ts a good distinction I haven't noticed before.-5 can be an expression or a value (point on a number line)

If you are using it in an equation, to keep it as a value, it needs parentheses, such as 4-(-5)^2 . If there are no parentheses, it's assumed to be an expression with the negative sign acting as an operator.

 

[John 14:6]

Have you guys been going non-stop all day? I admire your dedication to mathematics

 

[Bevo]

Have you guys been going non-stop all day?

I admire your dedication to mathematics

Gotta have something to do at work!