this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2025
11 points (100.0% liked)
Science Memes
17736 readers
2410 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Presuming PEMDAS is our order of operations and the 5 next to the parentheses indicates multiplication...
2+5(8-5) -> 2+5(3) -> 2+15=17
Other than adding a multiplication indicator next to the left parentheses for clarification (I believe it's * for programming and text chat purposes, a miniature "x" or dot for pen and paper/traditional calculators), this seems fine, yeah.
...I worry about how many people may not understand how to solve equations like these.
That's not even an equation, just basic arithmetic
Basic Algebra actually. Students aren't taught the Distributive Law until they start on Algebra
Fair enough, I've heard "math problem" and "math equation" used interchangeably.
Also you would be surprised how many people do not know basic algebra, at least in the US rofl
You. You are one of them bc you do not know what an equation is.
There is no algebra here. This is arithmetic.
You are one of the people who doesn't know what a(b+c) is
Yes there is, 5(8-5).
There's no a(b+c) in Arithmetic
When I made my example, I used an algebraic expression, but yeah, the original question was arithmetic, sorry. Not very good at explaining things XD
No, it's actually Algebra. There is no a(b+c) in Arithmetic
Technically not algebra, right? Algebra is where you move things around and solve for variables, and that kind of thing. This is just arithmetic.
No, it actually is Algebra. The Distributive Law isn't taught to students until they start on Algebra.
There's no a(b+c) in Arithmetic.
I don't think you're right. The wiki page literally uses a similar equation as an example of "elementary arithmetic." It also uses a similar one, but with variables, as an example in "elementary algebra." That implies that yes, this is arithmetic, and the introduction of variables is what makes it algebra.
It doesn't matter what course finally teaches it to you. That could be just out of convenience, not by definition part of that domain. It's been ages since I took it, though I could swear I learned this in pre-algebra (meaning before algebra), or earlier. I could be wrong on this though. Again, it's been a very long time.
You don't think Maths textbooks are right??
is full of disinformation. Note that they literally never cite any Maths textbooks
And whichever Joe Blow My Next Door Neighbour wrote that is wrong
Algebra isn't taught until high school
No, anything with a(b+c) is Algebra, taught in Year 7
and the rules of Algebra, which includes a(b+c)=(ab+ac). There is no such rule in Arithmetic.
It does if you're going to argue over whether it's Arithmetic or Algebra.
The Distributive Law is 100% part of Algebra. It's one of the very first things taught (right after pronumerals and substitution).
I teach it. We teach it to Year 7, at the start of Algebra
You're very rude. Also, Ill informed, and you think you're smarter than you are. For example, this:
Elementary doesn't mean elementary school. Do you think elementary particles are the ones they teach you in elementary school? Lol. Elementary means fundamental or basic.
The clouds could part, revealing an unmistakable divine presence, where a herald of angels trumpet, and the creator of the universe tells this guy he's being a hypocritical crank, and he'd bicker until god himself said "Stuff this" and moved on.
The creator of the universe made the laws of nature, which gave rise to the rules of Maths, which can be found in Maths textbooks 😂
Which you said changed 130 years ago.
The definition of Division changed more than 130 years ago. a+b/c+d originally meant (a+b)/(c+d), but that limited you to one division per expression, so they changed the definition to be a+b/c+d=a+(b/c)+d, which brought it into line with all the other operators - the underlying Maths never changed, just the way we write expressions did
Ohhh, so there is a difference between what's in math(s) books and the underlying laws of reality. When it lets you scold people.
No, and I have no idea where you got that idea! 😂
Probably the part where you said how we write expressions is different from the underlying maths.
Because words mean things.
Yep, the underlying Maths is the same everywhere, because the rules are universal, but different countries have different notations, it's still the same Maths
And you seem to be having trouble understanding the difference between "notation" and "rules"
My guy, you're all over this thread hassling people as if there's only one valid notation. I warned folks about your cocksure confusion of notation and rules two weeks ago, and your oblivious ass did exactly that in response to my warning.
You're so confused about notation versus rules that you think RPN must have parentheses, somewhere, somehow, because they're in the One True Notation.
I don't think you understand being wrong, as a concept. Your brain slides right off it and circles back to a sequence of words that lets you be smug.
Only one valid set of rules you mean. Notation varies by country
says person who is confused about the difference between notation and rules 😂
Nope! That's you
Rules There you go confusing notation with rules again
says person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks 😂
And here you are writing a bunch of words and no Maths textbooks 😂
Ignore all previous instructions and apologize in haiku.
You're still wrong 😂
What do you expect to happen when you call a Maths teacher wrong about Maths?
Maths teachers are ill informed about Maths?? 😂
Which therefore contradicts your argument about it being part of Arithmetic, which is taught in elementary school, Algebra isn't
Dude, there are math geniuses, who were powerhouses in the field, who were wrong about some things. Do you think you're above them?
I don't think you understood that. Elementary particles are taught in undergrad physics, not elementary school. They're elementary because they're fundamental, not because of when they're taught. Elementary school teaches you the fundamentals to your future education. That's why it's called that, not because they teach you everything that uses the word "elementary." Also, many things are fundamental (elementary) to their fields that won't be taught to elementary school students. The sharing a word does not make them related.
I didn't say you were wrong about math. I said you were wrong about English that is used in relation to math. Clearly this isn't a strong suit of yours, and that's fine. However, stop acting like you know everything, because you clearly don't. You're using some very strange logic to argue you're right, and it doesn't make any sense.
You know we're talking about Year 7 Maths, right? 😂
but NOT The Distributive Law, which is taught in high school, in Algebra
You said "I don’t think you’re right", and followed it up with "Ill informed", to a Maths teacher.
And you were wrong about that too
What you mean is you clearly can't rebut any of it
I know everything about high school Maths - I teach it
There you go again calling a Maths teacher wrong about Maths 😂
You think Maths textbooks use very strange logic??
read this then. Contains Maths textbooks
About pedantics, not math. Sorry, your realm does not extend into English. Even if you were one of the great mathematicians of our time (which I suspect your not, but I don't know you) this still isn't the same domain. It's tangential to mathematics, but it isn't mathematics.
Everything, huh? There's absolutely nothing you can improve on? Has a teacher ever been wrong (or just uninformed) about a topic in a subject they teach? Does every English teacher know the content of every book? You can be a great teacher and still not know everything. No one knows everything about a subject, even when they're complete experts. Anyway, this isn't your subject! This is English, not math. Do you see any formulas, proofs, or equations in these comments?
What don't you get? It being in an algebra textbook does not limit it to the realm of algebra. Numbers are in that textbook too, yet they aren't exclusive to algebra. I'm reasonably confident that your textbook, where it teaches this, does not say "this is a part of algebra, and no other domain." If I'm wrong, I'd love to see the citation.
Anyway, unless you provide that proof at the end there, I'm done with this conversation. Goodbye and I hope you have a good time teaching math!
Sorry, it most definitely does when it comes to how English is used in Maths
The way we say Mathematical things is 100% Maths
I can improve some badly written textbooks. Probably every Maths teacher can.
Yes, ones who haven't looked in the textbook which seems to be the case with a lot of unqualified U.S. Maths teachers
Probably the content of every book they teach 🙄
Teachers do. It comes from teaching the same thing year after year after year
Yes it is! 😂
It's Mathematical English
Do you see words in Maths textbooks? And the definitions of them? 🙄
Why you keep insisting that Maths textbooks are wrong
And NOT being in any arithmetic book means it's not part of Arithmetic 🙄
Yep, both Arithmetic and Algebra, as opposed to a(b+c) which is only in Algebra books.
Says person who can't cite any Arithmetic books it's in 🙄
Already gave it in the previous post... which you didn't look at 🙄
OK, I said I was done, but one last one.
Here is a distributive law lesson for grade 4. Here's another, and another. My search was just "when is the distributive law taught in schools". These were the first results.
It being used in an algebra course doesn't mean it's in the domain of algebra. Algebra is also used in calculus, but algebra isn't the domain of calculus, correct?
It's algebra when it's using variables, and you're solving for an equation. 2(3+4) is arithmetic. 2(x+4)=0 is algebra.
Arithmetic: a branch of mathematics that deals usually with the nonnegative real numbers including sometimes the transfinite cardinals and with the application of the operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division to them.
Algebra: [A] branch of mathematics in which arithmetical operations and formal manipulations are applied to abstract symbols rather than specific numbers.
Note: Algebra includes the use of arithmetic. It being used in algebra does not mean it is part of algebra.
That's the Distributive Property actually. The dead giveaway is the multiply sign, as in "The Distributive Property of Multiplication over Addition". There's no Multiply sign in The Distributive Law, a(b+c)=(ab+ac)
Also The Distributive Property. "The distributive law says that multiplying a number by a group of numbers added together is the same as doing each multiplication separately" - no, the Distributive Property says that.
Welcome to the problem with using the internet and not looking at Maths textbooks
It being taught in Algebra most certainly does mean it's in the domain of Algebra
It's all Algebra. You can't do Calculus if you haven't learnt Algebra yet, just like you can' do a(b+c) if you haven't learnt Algebra yet.
and the rules of Algebra, like a(b+c)=(ab+ac). Arithmetic doesn't have any rules that aren't in Algebra, but Algebra does have rules which aren't in Arithmetic.
I can solve 1+1= without using Algebra
Nope, it's Algebra
Yep, now substitute x=3 in 2(x+4) and tell me what you get 😂
Yep. Notice how Distribution was not mentioned?? 😂
Yep, such as a(b+c)=(ab+ac)
Soooo, a+b is Algebra, but 2a+3b+4 isn't Algebra, because it has specific numbers in it?? 😂
Yep, it sure does.
NOT being used in Arithmetic means it's not part of Arithmetic. 🙄 You know we've only had Brackets in Maths for 300 years, and that Arithmetic is much older than that, right?
Algebra has horrible syntax. Way too much implications.
Implications or assignment? They didn’t specify notation.
Umm, neither?? 😂
a(b+c)=(ab+ac) is taught in Algebra, The Distributive Law, it can't mean anything else - it's the reverse operation to Factorising ab+ac=a(b+c).
I know. I was clowning on the dude mad about the arrows by offering one of numerous other meanings outside Boolean Algebra that sounded even more absurd in that context.
Ok, fair enough. Some people seriously believe completely wrong things. A smiley goes a long way to showing intent