In other words, the equation only has a clear-cut answer if we all agree to use the same convention to solve it.
If you choose the multiplication first, you get 1. If you think the division comes first because you’re following the convention of working left to right, you get 16.
While everyone agrees that the 2+2 in parentheses should be calculated first, they disagree over whether the division or multiplication comes next. 2+2=4 is a universal truth, but the answer to 8 ÷ 2(2+2) = ? depends on how you choose to solve it. If you use PEMDAS on the original equation, the answer is 1.Įxcept PEMDAS is not a mathematical law, it’s a convention – one that mathematicians argue about whether or not to use in every case. Some of us were taught the “order of operations” rule in elementary school: “Please excuse my dear Aunt Sally,” or PEMDAS, which stands for Parentheses Exponents Multiplication Division Addition Subtraction. In the case of these equations, it’s all about the way the problem is expressed. But the truth is there’s plenty of ambiguity in both math and science – that’s why people still do research in these areas! Perhaps more tellingly, we think of math (incorrectly) as lacking any ambiguity. It would apparently be too humiliating to say “sorry, I was wrong,” so we just don’t. So why do we argue about these pointless problems endlessly instead of doing something more important? One reason is psychological, the other mathematical.įirst, we feel embarrassed when we’re wrong, especially in front of people we know, so we’ll often double down on our own opinions and answers (even after they’ve become indefensible). Have you ever come away from an Internet argument thinking someone was really brilliant? In addition, people tend to get wrapped up in these games because they think it provides them an opportunity to show how smart they are.Īt the end of the day, these problems are compelling because they give us a reason to try and feel superior. They consulted a social psychologist who explained that a couple of things go into making arithmetic into a life or death battle.įirst, social media has – sadly – become a place where we expect to argue, so we do, no matter how low the stakes. The website Slate even tried to address why we get so riled up about these things. In 2013, there was another, similar equation that caused people to reach for each other’s throats: 6 ÷ 2 (1+2) = ? Another thing humans are bad at? Learning from the past. the least shocking turn of events, pure anger failed to resolve the argument. You know, except when it doesn’t (which is always). Surely the people who act like it’s their job to tell people on the Internet they’re wrong should weigh in. more bickering failed to resolve anything. Surely this objective math machine would produce the One True Answer! they didn’t.Īfter the calculator crusaders came those who explained that it’s the person not the machine that’s the problem. The first people to try and prove that they were the real math warriors were those whose weapons were calculators. But what can we say? People are bored and they need to be know-it-alls. you’ve ever argued with someone on the Internet, you know it’s an entirely fruitless endeavor. they’re not above insulting complete strangers. There are two camps when it comes to the so-called “correct” answer: those who “know” the answer is 1, and those who stake their reputation on the answer being 16. Math is supposed to be something we could rely on to have only one right answer.īut that’s simply not true – and it’s boggling people’s minds. Most of life is not black and white – but we were always taught that math is. In fact, it’s anything but simple.Įven people with mathematics degrees managed to disagree over the answer to: 8 ÷ 2 (2+2) = ? why people are getting all bunched up: there are very few things in the world with correct answers. Whoever said “math is fun” never met the people who got into countless arguments over a tricky equation. Take, for example, the way one tricky math problem was posed: “Only 1 in 1,000,000 people can solve this simple equation.” It’s one thing to argue about politics on the Internet, but it takes a special kind of person to get invested in an argument about math.
0 kommentar(er)
