Hello Everybody,

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

This is only a test ...

This is only a test ...

This is only a test ...

The sysop who is able to solve this problem
correctly will receive a ticket to visit the
one who will not be named ...

For Life,
Lee

--
Biden 2024 - Finisth The Job

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Lee Lofaso -> ALL skrev 2024-06-26 16:29:

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

That depends. Please write it in proper mathematical notation.


--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

That depends. Please write it in proper mathematical notation.

To me that is pretty clear and obvious ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hello Ward,

On Wednesday June 26 2024 22:22, you wrote to Bj”rn Felten:

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

That depends. Please write it in proper mathematical notation.

To me that is pretty clear and obvious ...

Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Bj”rn - it is ambiguous.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20130111
* Origin: Michiel's laptop (2:280/464.5555)

Hello Michiel,

On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 23:03:42 +0200, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

That depends. Please write it in proper mathematical notation.

To me that is pretty clear and obvious ...

Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Björn - it is ambiguous.

Seems pretty self explanatory using the order of operations. Oh wait, you don't have to. Just go from left to right. :)

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240309
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hello Nicholas,

On Wednesday June 26 2024 17:16, you wrote to me:

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

That depends. Please write it in proper mathematical notation.

To me that is pretty clear and obvious ...

Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Bj”rn - it is
ambiguous.

Seems pretty self explanatory using the order of operations. Oh wait,
you don't have to. Just go from left to right. :)

From left to right: ((7/7)/7)x7=(1/7)x7=1

By order of operation: (7/7)/(7x7)=1/49

or: (7/(7/7))x7=(7/1)x7=49


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20130111
* Origin: Michiel's laptop (2:280/464.5555)

Michiel van der Vlist -> Ward Dossche skrev 2024-06-26 23:03:
MvdV> Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Bj”rn - it is ambiguous.

I guess you need higher mathematical education that just the ordinary "never mind the rules, just use your calculator" to understand why this, and so many other crazy maths stuff circulating on the web, isn't what it appears to be.


--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Michiel,

To me that is pretty clear and obvious ...

Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Bj”rn - it is ambiguous.

It's a silly kind of argumentation with the sole purpose of having an argument.

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hello Bj”rn,

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

That depends.

Mathematics is a universal language.

Please write it in proper mathematical notation.

For the mathematically impaired -

7 ö 7 ö 7 x 7 = ?

There.
The two dots along the slash included.
Just like the two dots on top of the zero in your name.

For Life,
Lee

--
Biden 2024 - Finisth The Job

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Lee!

27 Jun 24 15:22, you wrote to Bj?rn Felten:

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = ?

[fido@blabla ~]$ echo $(( 7 / 7 / 7 x 7))
-bash: 7 / 7 / 7 x 7: syntax error in expression (error token is "x 7")

Karel

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240209
* Origin: Plast DATA (2:423/39)

Hello Ward,

To me that is pretty clear and obvious ...

Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Bj”rn - it is ambiguous.

It's a silly kind of argumentation with the sole purpose of having an argument.

I did it! I did it!
I did what the one who cannot be named said could never be done!
I stumped the dummy!
Nobody can argue with that!
Not even the one who cannot be named!
So there!

For Life,
Lee

--
You can tell Monopoly is an old game because there's a luxury tax and rich people can go to jail.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 12:34:04 +0200, Michiel Van Der Vlist -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

Seems pretty self explanatory using the order of operations. Oh wait,
you don't have to. Just go from left to right. :)

MvdV> From left to right: ((7/7)/7)x7=(1/7)x7=1

MvdV> By order of operation: (7/7)/(7x7)=1/49

MvdV> or: (7/(7/7))x7=(7/1)x7=49

Ah, you're one of those people. :)

Multiplication and division are on the same level in the order of operation (PEMDAS):

1) Parenthesis
2) Exponents
3) Multiplication AND Division
4) Addition AND Subtraction

No need to make it harder than it is, and also no need to add anything to it. Just do it from left to right.

7 / 7 / 7 x 7 = 1

At least you answered it first, so you get whatever ticket that other guy was offering. :)

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 13:13:54 +0200, Björn Felten -> Michiel Van Der Vlist wrote:

I guess you need higher mathematical education that just the
ordinary "never mind the rules, just use your calculator" to understand why this, and so many other crazy maths stuff circulating on the web, isn't what it appears to be.

In this case, it's *exactly* what it appears to be, since they are both on the same level. If there was some addition or subtraction in the beginning or middle of it, then yes, the order would change.

It's not higher mathematical education that's needed, it's just *not* over thinking it. :)

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hello Nicholas,

On Thursday June 27 2024 17:16, you wrote to me:

MvdV>> By order of operation: (7/7)/(7x7)=1/49

MvdV>> or: (7/(7/7))x7=(7/1)x7=49

Ah, you're one of those people. :)

Yes, I am.

Multiplication and division are on the same level in the order of operation (PEMDAS):

1) Parenthesis
2) Exponents
3) Multiplication AND Division
4) Addition AND Subtraction

Not according to the rules I was thaught.

MVDWOP (Meneer Van Dalen Wacht Op Antwoord)

Machtsverheffen, Vermenigvuldigen, Delen, Worteltrekken, Optellen, Aftrekken.

Multiplication goes BEFORE division.

No need to make it harder than it is, and also no need to add anything
to it. Just do it from left to right.

Not according to the rules I was thaught. So the rules are different in different parts of the world. Thanks for parenthesis.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20130111
* Origin: Michiel's laptop (2:280/464.5555)

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:25:24 +0200, Michiel Van Der Vlist -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

Multiplication and division are on the same level in the order of
operation (PEMDAS):

1) Parenthesis
2) Exponents
3) Multiplication AND Division
4) Addition AND Subtraction

MvdV> Not according to the rules I was thaught.

MvdV> MVDWOP (Meneer Van Dalen Wacht Op Antwoord)

MvdV> Machtsverheffen, Vermenigvuldigen, Delen, Worteltrekken, Optellen,
MvdV> Aftrekken.

MvdV> Multiplication goes BEFORE division.

MvdV> Not according to the rules I was thaught. So the rules are different in
MvdV> different parts of the world. Thanks for parenthesis.
I tried googling your acronym above, and found this from a Dutch site that I was able to translate to English:

https://www.mathematischinstituut.nl/artikelen/de-volgorde-van-bewerkingen/

"Dit lijkt wel een goede volgorde, maar als we nu terug gaan naar onze som van hierboven dan komen we onmiddelijk weer in de problemen. Want we weten dan vermenigvuldigen en delen voor optellen en aftrekken komt, maar hoe zit dat dan als we moeten kiezen tussen vermenigvuldigen en delen?

In dit geval kiezen we voor de meest linker operatie. We gaan dus door de rekensom heen zoals we een zin lezen, van links naar rechts."

"This seems like a good order, but if we go back to our sum above then we will get back into trouble. For we then know multiplying and dividing for addition and subtraction comes, but what is it when we have to choose between multiplying and dividing?

In this case, we choose the leftmost operation. So we go through the calculation as we read a sentence from left to right."

Seems to be the exact same thing as PEMDAS, which is also mentioned in the very first line of that site.

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hello Michiel,

MvdV>>> By order of operation: (7/7)/(7x7)=1/49

MvdV>>> or: (7/(7/7))x7=(7/1)x7=49

Ah, you're one of those people. :)

MvdV> Yes, I am.

I am not so sure.

Multiplication and division are on the same level in the order of
operation (PEMDAS):

1) Parenthesis
2) Exponents
3) Multiplication AND Division
4) Addition AND Subtraction

MvdV> Not according to the rules I was thaught.

What rules might those be? Those taught by the Romans? Or the Greeks?
We both know that nobody wrote the rules. We all make them up as time
goes by. Sometimes they work. Sometimes they don't. And that is how we
learn. By trial and error.

MvdV> MVDWOP (Meneer Van Dalen Wacht Op Antwoord)

MvdV> Machtsverheffen, Vermenigvuldigen, Delen, Worteltrekken, Optellen,
MvdV> Aftrekken.

MvdV> Multiplication goes BEFORE division.

PEMDAS is unclear on the subject, as it states multiplication and
division rather than multiplication before division. But it does
follow with the phrase (from left to right) and then addition and
subtraction (from left to right).

No need to make it harder than it is, and also no need to add anything
to it. Just do it from left to right.

MvdV> Not according to the rules I was thaught.

So who made the rules? Can you tell me? Whatever rules they might be,
you should know. But that is the way of the world. We just accept the
rules. Whatever those rules might be. Without question. Kind of like cicumcision. Snip snip! All done!

MvdV> So the rules are different in different parts of the world.

Different rules for different folks. One set for Romans. Another
set for Greeks. And let's not forget about the set for the Chinese.

MvdV> Thanks for parenthesis.

Nobody made the rules. Whatever "rules" that do exist are only
versions of what others think they should be. For example -

6 ö 2 (1 + 2) = ?

The order of operations are only what you want them to be,
depending on your moment in time. If you use the current rules
that you are most familiar with the "correct" answer is 9. But
if you use the rules as they were prior to 1917 the "correct"
answer is 1. So which is it? Or is either of those answers
correct?

For Life,
Lee

--
Fox News Slogan - Rich people paying rich people
to tell middle class people to blame poor people.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Nicholas Boel -> Björn Felten skrev 2024-06-28 00:19:

In this case, it's *exactly* what it appears to be,

Sigh. This is why so much crazy stuff circulates on the web.

With my proper mathematical notation comment, I meant to write it like you would with a pen and pencil or on a blackboard.

Keyboard one-liners are not well suited for mathematical notation. As Michiel explained, it needs some heavy use of parenthesises.

... e.g.

7
- - -
7
- - -
7 * 7

... or

7
- - -
7 * 7
- - -
7



--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:12:14 +0200, Björn Felten -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

In this case, it's *exactly* what it appears to be,

Sigh. This is why so much crazy stuff circulates on the web.

Why's that? Because people still need math done on a blackboard?

With my proper mathematical notation comment, I meant to write it
like you would with a pen and pencil or on a blackboard.

E = mc² is a "proper mathematical notation" as definited on wikipedia. I'm not sure why you need pictures drawn for you.

Keyboard one-liners are not well suited for mathematical notation.
As Michiel explained, it needs some heavy use of parenthesises.

Sure they are, if you know math, you don't need someone to draw a pictures for you.

No parenthesis are needed in that line. *shrug*

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Nicholas Boel -> Bj�rn Felten skrev 2024-06-28 23:09:

No parenthesis are needed in that line. *shrug*

So how do you differ

7
-
7
- -
7

... from

7
- -
7
-
7

... without parenthesis and/or the above picture with your keyboard notation then?

To a true, old school mathematician the two (rudimentary) pictures above need no effing rules to interpret.


--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 05:59:20 +0200, Bj�rn Felten -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

So how do you differ

7
-
7
- -
7

... from

7
- -
7
-
7

... without parenthesis and/or the above picture with your keyboard notation then?

It depends, is "-" minus, and "- -" division according to your blackboard drawing top-down methodology? There is no "- -" listed on any math symbols list sites I can find out there, so it must be something from the 60s-70s when computers maybe couldn't do proper symbols?

Either way, and if I'm correct in my assumption, the first one would be 6, and the second one would be -6, as division comes before subtraction in the order of operations. Again, no need for parenthesis. If there were parenthesis, you would do whatever was in those first.

To a true, old school mathematician the two (rudimentary) pictures above need no effing rules to interpret.

There's nothing 'old school' about it. It's basic, simple math. Why do you insist on adding parenthesis everywhere?

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Nicholas Boel -> Bj�rn Felten skrev 2024-06-29 01:38:

It depends, is "-" minus, and "- -" division according to your
blackboard drawing

Really? Why would I write minus signs on separate lines?

Surely you understand that in those RUDIMENTARY pictures, it was supposed to be lines. For FTN reasons, I can't use three minus signs.

So, maybe now you can answer my question: How do you write the two different expressions in your keyboard one-line notation?


--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Björn Felten wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-

Michiel van der Vlist -> Ward Dossche skrev 2024-06-26 23:03:
MvdV> Then please enlighten us, because to me - like Björn - it is ambiguous.

I guess you need higher mathematical education that just the
ordinary "never mind the rules, just use your calculator" to understand why this, and so many other crazy maths stuff circulating on the web, isn't what it appears to be.

Just use your calculator is enough to see it is ambiguous.
Use the calculator that comes with Windows.
Compare the results in standard mode and scientific mode.

Chris
... 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 07:17:18 +0200, Bj�rn Felten -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

Really? Why would I write minus signs on separate lines?

Surely you understand that in those RUDIMENTARY pictures, it was supposed to be lines. For FTN reasons, I can't use three minus signs.

This doesn't answer my question, if my guesses were even correct.

So, maybe now you can answer my question: How do you write the two different expressions in your keyboard one-line notation?

Exactly how they are written in your top/down methodology, just on one line :)

1) 7 - 7 / 7 = 6
2) 7 / 7 - 7 = -6

Still no parenthesis needed. Knowing the order of operations, one knows to do division before subtraction. However, if #1 was written like this, it would have a different result because parenthesis goes before division, which I'm sure you understand - being an old school mathematician and all:

(7 - 7) / 7 = 0

Whether it be PEMDAS, BEDMAS, BOMDAS, whatever abbreviation Michiel used, and whatever else is out there, they're all just acronyms for the "order of operations", which never changes.

From what I've noticed, some countries call parenthesis brackets (I don't know why), where we call "[]" brackets. So the acronym changes to fit whatever country and however they learned the order of operations.

Either way, the actual "order of operations" stays the same. Maybe the world shouldn't have made up different acronyms for it - as that obviously led to a lot of confusion, but there's nothing we can do about the past, except to try to stay on the right track in the future.

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Nicholas Boel -> Bj�rn Felten skrev 2024-06-29 14:46:

Surely you understand that in those RUDIMENTARY pictures, it was
supposed to be lines. For FTN reasons, I can't use three minus signs.

This doesn't answer my question, if my guesses were even correct.

Incredible. Well, I'll try with longer lines then, so you can understand my answer:

7
___

7
_______

7


... or

7
_______

7
___

7

(No minus signs were hurt in this picture.)



--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 23:42:46 +0200, Bj�rn Felten -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

This doesn't answer my question, if my guesses were even correct.

Incredible. Well, I'll try with longer lines then, so you can understand my answer:

If my original guess wasn't correct, just say so. You seem to be trying to lead me into an abyss I don't care to go to.

One underscore, two, or three. Doesn't matter. A shorter line makes me guess subtraction, a longer line makes me guess division. I don't know what you're trying to do, but if it's something you're whipping up from 40+ years ago, I've already lost interest.

The order of operations is constant. Whether you interpret it differently from most others (in many languages) is your problem, not mine.

End result, one of Michiel's answers was correct first, so he gets whatever prize was offered. A ticket to Lee's funzone, per se. However, if it's the same "he who we don't name" as has been going on in this echo for a few years now, it's obviously death. Which is pretty shitty, so maybe you should take up your frustrations with him, instead.

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Nicholas Boel -> Bj�rn Felten skrev 2024-06-30 05:40:

One underscore, two, or three. Doesn't matter. A shorter line makes me guess subtraction, a longer line makes me guess division. I don't know what you're trying to do, but if it's something you're whipping up from 40+ years ago, I've already lost interest.

I guess you never got to fractions at school. May I recommend some reading about numerators and denominators?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraction


--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

I guess you never got to fractions at school. May I recommend some
reading about numerators and denominators?

Please be aware of #18 in the set of "Dossche's Laws"..

"Abandon any on-line discussion which stretches beyond 2 cycles. If more time is needed it will lead nowhere"

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Hello Nicholas,

[..]

Still no parenthesis needed. Knowing the order of operations, one knows to do division before subtraction. However, if #1 was written like this, it would have a different result because parenthesis goes before division, which I'm sure you understand - being an old school mathematician and all:

(7 - 7) / 7 = 0

The order of operations changes over time.

Whether it be PEMDAS, BEDMAS, BOMDAS, whatever abbreviation Michiel used, and whatever else is out there, they're all just acronyms for the "order of
operations", which never changes.

Please. Don't make me laugh. Who wrote the rules? Nobody. As I tried
to explain to Michiel (he is very dense) not everything is the same.
I even showed him an example to make my point very clear -

6 ö 2 (1 + 2) = ?

Go ahead. Solve the problem yourself. It is not that hard.

The correct answer is 9. Or is it?

Prior to 1917, the correct answer is 1.

So which answer is correct?

Since nobody wrote the rules, it is whatever goes.

From what I've noticed, some countries call parenthesis brackets (I don't know why), where we call "[]" brackets. So the acronym changes to fit whatever country and however they learned the order of operations.

Rules? There are no rules. So what does it matter? The rules of order
are whatever one wants to make them out to be. And from whatever time.

Either way, the actual "order of operations" stays the same.

According to who? The Romans? The Greeks? What about the Chinese?

Maybe the world shouldn't have made up different acronyms for it - as that obviously led to a lot of confusion, but there's nothing we can do about the past, except to try to stay on the right track in the future.

The rules of order are an approximation, made at different times,
and even acronyms differing depending on time of usage. So what is
the right track? What is the left track? Is there any track one can
ever be sure to be on?

For Life,
Lee

--
The first thing a cult does is claim that everyone else is lying to you.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Ward Dossche wrote to Not To Anyone Specific ... <=-

I guess you never got to fractions at school. May I recommend some
reading about numerators and denominators?

Please be aware of #18 in the set of "Dossche's Laws"..

"Abandon any on-line discussion which stretches beyond 2 cycles. If
more time is needed it will lead nowhere"

Please add a Corollary to this Law that modifies it to only ONE cycle of conversation if said conversation is with a person named Beeeeeorn in a FidoNet echo.



... The world is full of surprises, very few of which are pleasant.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)

Nicholas Boel wrote to Björn Felten <=-

Incredible. Well, I'll try with longer lines then, so you can understand my answer:

If my original guess wasn't correct, just say so. You seem to be trying
to lead me into an abyss I don't care to go to.

Any time you try to engage with Beeeeorn, that's what he does. Every. Single. Time.

One underscore, two, or three. Doesn't matter. A shorter line makes me guess subtraction, a longer line makes me guess division. I don't know what you're trying to do, but if it's something you're whipping up from 40+ years ago, I've already lost interest.

He's doing what he always does. Trying to show that he's "clever", and failing miserably.

The order of operations is constant. Whether you interpret it
differently from most others (in many languages) is your problem, not mine.

Goddam right.


... The future's uncertain, the end is always near.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)

On Sun, 30 Jun 2024 18:17:20 +0200, Ward Dossche -> Not To Anyone Specific ... wrote:

I guess you never got to fractions at school. May I recommend some
reading about numerators and denominators?

Please be aware of #18 in the set of "Dossche's Laws"..

"Abandon any on-line discussion which stretches beyond 2 cycles. If more time is needed it will lead nowhere"

It took more than 2 cycles just to figure out what the hell he was talking about. How does that play into your laws?

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

On Sun, 30 Jun 2024 14:05:00 -0500, Dan Clough -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

He's doing what he always does. Trying to show that he's "clever", and failing miserably.

Welp, I guess he got me. Somehow he was able to pull fractions out of his ass, and wrote it out in the ugliest way I have ever seen, even for a computer. :|

*shrug*, live and learn...

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

On Sun, 30 Jun 2024 19:56:40 +0200, Lee Lofaso -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

6 ÷ 2 (1 + 2) = ?

Go ahead. Solve the problem yourself. It is not that hard.

The correct answer is 9. Or is it?

Correct, when following the order of operations.

Prior to 1917, the correct answer is 1.

So which answer is correct?

Apparantly, prior to 1917, they didn't read from left to right?

Since nobody wrote the rules, it is whatever goes.

Here's some nice pictures for you:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/12/fb/22/12fb223973fc3ff2ae9e831fca94e1ee.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9b/af/30/9baf30b7ded60fb1695c1ecf6c809108.jpg

This is some 5th and 6th grade stuff we're going on about here, but I suppose it's a bit more interesting than the echo having no activity whatsoever for a week.

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Nicholas Boel wrote to Lee Lofaso <=-

Since nobody wrote the rules, it is whatever goes.

Here's some nice pictures for you:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/12/fb/22/12fb223973fc3ff2ae9e831fca94e1ee.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9b/af/30/9baf30b7ded60fb1695c1ecf6c809108.jpg

This is some 5th and 6th grade stuff we're going on about here, but I suppose it's a bit more interesting than the echo having no activity whatsoever for a week.

You have to remember that "Lee", who is actually Beeeeorn's sockpuppet, dropped out of school midway through 3rd grade, so this is all very
advanced for him/them.




... Can you tell me how to get, how to get to Sesame Street?
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)

Ward Dossche -> Not To Anyone Specific

And yet you quoted me. :)

But yes, I confess. I violated my own policy. I should have taken this to netmail a long time ago. I thank you for doing what I always ask of every participant of echoes that I "moderate".

It's just that I was taken by surprise to see that someone could actually confuse a fraction symbol - the horizontal line - with a minus operator.

I'll probably write an article on it. At the moment, I am recovering from a stroke (no, nothing serious, just a wee bit of speech impediment), so maybe in next week's issue.


--
Conning people is easy. You just need to overcome their intelligence. But convincing people they've been conned is much harder. You need to overcome their pride.
..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hey Dan,

Please add a Corollary to this Law that modifies it to only ONE cycle of conversation if said conversation is with a person named Beeeeeorn in a FidoNet echo.

Hmmmmm .... I think I'll pass ...

But you need to have a thorough understanding of the concept of "freedom of speech" when questioning issues put forward by Bjorn.

I think Bjorn had a point, not that I agree with it, but he had a point anyway.

"Freedom of speech" is such an interesting little thing. The one whose name we are not supposed to mention even prompted me to define law #17...

"Lying is an ultimate form of free speech"

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

Re: Math Test
By: Nicholas Boel to Björn Felten on Sat Jun 29 2024 07:46 am

Whether it be PEMDAS, BEDMAS, BOMDAS, whatever abbreviation Michiel used, and whatever else is out there, they're all just acronyms for the "order of operations", which never changes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaD3kGSxaVs
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #3:
ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange
Norco, CA WX: 91.5øF, 22.0% humidity, 14 mph WSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

On Sun, 30 Jun 2024 20:37:30 -0700, Rob Swindell -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaD3kGSxaVs

"Mathematics is not a game you should play by your own rules." :)

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 04:49:12 +0200, Bj�rn Felten -> Nicholas Boel wrote:

It's just that I was taken by surprise to see that someone could actually confuse a fraction symbol - the horizontal line - with a minus operator.

You got me. Is that what you want to hear?

There were no fractions in any of the discussions we were having before you posted it. You changed the subtraction sign we were originally talking about to a fraction, then you waited 2 full days to tell me what your little "blackboard" picture actually meant.

Good job. You deserve a pat on the back. However, it still doesn't change the order of operations, which was my original point. *shrug*

Regards,
Nick

... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:115.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderb
* Origin: _thePharcyde distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hello Nicholas,

6 ö 2 (1 + 2) = ?

Go ahead. Solve the problem yourself. It is not that hard.

The correct answer is 9. Or is it?

Correct, when following the order of operations.

An order of operations is not the same thing.

Prior to 1917, the correct answer is 1.

So which answer is correct?

Apparantly, prior to 1917, they didn't read from left to right?

Trying to imitate Donald Trump is not your strong suit.

http://5010.mathed.usu.edu/Fall2013/PJensen/History.html

Since nobody wrote the rules, it is whatever goes.

Here's some nice pictures for you:

History of the rules of order is quite telling, as noted above.
Please feel free to eductate yourself on the subject.

This is some 5th and 6th grade stuff we're going on about here, but I suppose it's a bit more interesting than the echo having no activity whatsoever for a week.

GEMS are all the rage these days. For how long, nobody knows ...

For Life,
Lee

--
Fox News Slogan - Rich people paying rich people
to tell middle class people to blame poor people.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)