[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 9 KB, 540x285, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10851069 No.10851069[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Simplify :^)

>> No.10851077

Let's cut out the usage of the antiquated divisor symbol. That would help the human race cut back on algebraic errors.

>> No.10851087

>another [math]\div[/math] thread

>>10851077
yes. i think the only reason the symbol is known nowadays is because of modern calculators actually. i don't think you'll find it much at all in math literature before mechanical adding machines/cash registers became widespread.

>> No.10851105

>>10851069
No enough information. What is the value of x?

>> No.10851118
File: 5 KB, 211x239, 121509-full.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10851118

>>10851105

>> No.10851132

>>10851069
2 × what? You left out whatever it was multiplied by you dummy.

>> No.10851186

5/(x)

>> No.10851370

>>10851069
5x

>> No.10851412

>>10851077
10/2x is no better

>> No.10851415

>>10851412
yeah but 5/x is or even 5 * 1/x

>> No.10851526

>>10851087
It's not that confusing, you just break the equation down into components, in this case '10' and '2x'.

The argument that '2x' is an 'implied multiplication' is fucking stupid because by the same logic '10' is an implied power.

>> No.10851724

>>10851069
5/x

>> No.10851737

>>10851069
Two times what?

>> No.10851744

>>10851069
It is written ambiguously and therefore 5x or 10/2x. It is not written correctly.

>> No.10851821

>>10851069
10/2x
10/2x=0
2x=0
x=0
Q.e.d

>> No.10851838

>>10851069
>5/x
?
Constant over variable isn't that interesting after Calc 2.

>> No.10851876

>>10851526
>The argument that '2x' is an 'implied multiplication'
Mathfags couldn't be bothered writing shit on the board over and over so they turned everything into a soup of one letter variables and "oh let's just not write the sign it'll be faster". This ruined math forever, but it is too late to fix it. The only choice is to remember whatever random bullshit rules apply in every situation and hope everyone gets them right.

>> No.10852212

>>10851087

/

>> No.10852292

5x OR 5/x OR any real number. The answer is a superposition of states.

>> No.10853235

>>10852292
BASED

>> No.10853236

>>10851069
Not until you use proper notation like a god damned adult.

>> No.10853239

>>10853236
That is proper notation

>> No.10853240

>>10851412
>he thinks that's a fraction
You are like little baby
Use [math] \frac{10}{2x) [/math] or [math] \frac{10}{2) x [/math]

>> No.10853248

>>10851838
The electric and gravitational potentials dare to disagree.

>> No.10853251

>>10851069
Obelus always implies division between the left and the right side, therefore 5/x and the answer to the other thread is 1. Everybody who answered differently is a cretin

>> No.10853252

>>10851838
>Calc 2
>making everything about dumbfuck (((school)))
>implying mathematics isn't valuable far beyond the scope of (((school)))
fuck off shlomo

>> No.10853257

>>10853251
>Obelus always implies division between the left and the right side
2÷1×3
so by your logic that equals 2/3?
and what about 2÷3÷5? which is the left and which is the right?

>> No.10853258

>>10851370
this

>> No.10853268

>>10853257
You might want to think before you post things next time, it's literally primitive. Left and right side are of course defined for each obelus symbol, why do you think there is any sort of ambiguity?

2÷3÷5 = (2÷3)÷5 = 2÷(3÷5) = 2/3/5 = 10/3

Are you still confused?

>> No.10853274

>>10851069
-20x

>> No.10853278

>>10853268
By your logic 2÷1×3=2÷(1×3)

>> No.10853281

>>10853278
Yes, and it's true.

>> No.10853288
File: 34 KB, 645x729, brainlet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10853288

>>10853268
>(2÷3)÷5=10/3

>> No.10853293

>>10853288
Obviously I meant 2/15, do you feel superior now that you managed to catch such a trivial mistake? Smoothbrain.

>> No.10853301
File: 22 KB, 512x512, brainlet3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10853301

>>10853288
>(2÷3)÷5 = 2÷(3÷5)
>2÷(3÷5)=2/15
>Obelus always implies division between the left and the right side

>> No.10853309

>>10853301
Yes, that is the literal historical definition. You managed to copy my words quite well, you might be a good code monkey one day.

>> No.10853313
File: 44 KB, 800x450, brainlet4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10853313

>>10853309
>(2÷3)÷5 = 2÷(3÷5)

>> No.10853458

>>10853313
You think it's wrong? Oh my

>> No.10853459

>>10851069
5x

>> No.10853496

>>10853309
>historical
It doesn't apply any longer. It now works the same as the multiplication symbol, applying only to the two factors directly to the left and right. Use parenthesis if you want to a certain section to be the divisor.

>>10851876
This. Once you start explicitly writing in your multiplication symbols then there is no ambiguity like this bullshit. Writing a dot doesn't even take that long.