this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2025
11 points (100.0% liked)
Science Memes
17736 readers
2510 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
I don't think you understand any of it, not even Year 7
says person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks
in the foreground. In the background it does or it would give wrong answers. You understand that apps can do things that you don't see, right??
Only the notation is different, the rules are the same
says the person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks 😂
Textbooks do indeed define the notation and rules. 1+1=2 is defined as the notation to use to show that I had 1 thing and now I have 2 things
says person ignoring all the people who actually did learn from me. That would be the people who are open to being wrong about how they thought it was done
Yes they are! 😂
No, just literal textbook definition, which you refuse to look at 😂
So the app adds them in the background. Do you think apps don't know how many "a" you're talking about if you don't write 1a? Guess what, it knows in the background that a=1a, and that the 1 in 1-2-3 is +1, etc. Not typing them in doesn't mean they aren't being added
yet again you seem to have me confused with someone else. I have no idea what you're talking about
Maths teacher
says person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks
gaslighters gonna gaslight - there's nothing unpredictable about that
teaching the rules of Maths
No it isn't, because they, having seen it also in the textbook, understand how it works
improved, because they don't sit there going "Nah nah nah, nah nah nah, I'm not listening and not looking in the textbook!" 😂
...
You are functionally illiterate.
RPN is not an "app." RPN is a NOTATION. That's what the N is. It is a completely different way of doing math! It works on paper! You troll! It is a syntax for performing calculations using a stack-based method. There are no fucking parentheses - anywhere. It has no need for that concept. Operations use the top values on the stack. Order of operations is implicit in the order of operands, and completely different from the one thing you insist is both universal, and mutable, and a notation, and the rules, and whatever else lets you never shut the fuck up.
Do you know anything that's not in a textbook for children?
says person who doesn't understand how apps work
What do you think is behind the RPN calculators? A person?? 😂
Yep, so is ALGEBRA 😂 The rules are independent of both
Yep, notation, not rules
Nope! It's only a different NOTATION - you just said that yourself! 😂
So does Algebra - surprise, surprise, surprise 😂
NOTATION
And I'm guessing you think there is no 1 anywhere in a+b, and there's no + anywhere in 1-2
Which you could write explicitly with Brackets. 2 3 + 4 x = (2+3)x4
No it isn't. 2 3 + 4 x gives the same answer as (2+3)x4, and 3 4 x 2 + gives the same answer as 2+3x4. Note that in the first example 2 3 + is effectively being bracketed, as otherwise you'd get a wrong answer by the order of operations rules
Yep, everything in high school Maths textbooks 😂
Distribution is "effectively" multiplication. Nothing you say, nothing you point to, could possibly change that, because they will always get the same answer, and if getting the right answer is all that makes two things the same, then shut the fuck up.
No it isn't, it's Brackets. a(b+c)=(ab+ac) <== Brackets Now solve (ab+ac), or do you think that (8-5) is subtraction and not brackets? 😂 It's actually the reverse process to Factorising, whereas Multiplication is the reverse operation to Division - not even remotely the same thing.
says person ignoring Maths textbooks 😂
No they don't! 😂 That's why it's a Law
1/a(b+c)=1/(ab+ac)
1/ax(b+c)=(b+c)/a
Oops! (b+c) went from being in the denominator to being in the numerator, leading to WRONG ANSWER 😂 Welcome to why we have The Distributive Law
No it isn't, but that's the first thing which has to happen. See previous point where they aren't even the same answer, therefore one of them is wrong
says person still refusing to look in Maths textbooks 🙄
Syntax is notation is rules, as it suits your ability to be smug at people.
How did I let you rope me into honestly trying to get through to you? I called all of this from a mile off, you did exactly what I said while insisting you weren't, and I'm still left desperately hoping some combination of words will work. It doesn't matter what I write here; you're just going to quote every sentence, respond "tExTbOoK!", and pick a sneering emoji.
I never should've edited what the first reply said in full:
Fuck off.
Gaslighters can't gaslight Maths teachers about Maths. You should know that by now
That you were going to ignore Maths textbooks? I called that too 😂
Nope. You never said I was going to prove you wrong
I've been doing the same thing I always do - proving you wrong with Maths textbooks 😂
The question is, why do you refuse to look in any?
You never should've commented at all gaslighter
says person in an admission of defeat