Finally a video that just gave me the explanation without nonsense haha

@teetee-zq3og

5 ай бұрын

Lmaoooo😂😂😂😂😂

@peterthomas5792

Ай бұрын

Unfortunately, the explanation is 100% wrong.

@Islam-and-boxing

Ай бұрын

​@@peterthomas5792 it really isn't wrong. I used this method in a question in my coding course. You have to know about pemdas for coding. The result was correct because I followed this explanation.

@peterthomas5792

Ай бұрын

​@@Islam-and-boxing Coding knows nothing about juxtaposed multiplication or stacked exponentiation, so coding will never teach you why PEMDAS is wrong. Try doing a maths course taught by someone who actually USES maths professionally such as, well, a mathematician, physicist or engineer.

@Islam-and-boxing

Ай бұрын

@@peterthomas5792 Well you've made a claim... Can you now provide the evidence of how it's 100% wrong?

Surfed for hours to find a clear short summary of the ‘Order of Operations’ PEMDAS to revise algebra. This one is the best.

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Aww thanks so much! We're so glad this was helpful. Cheers to learning, friend! 😊💕🙏🏻

@macbain1395

9 ай бұрын

@@mathically You are INCORRECT with your "invisible times". __ONLY__ the USA teaches this nonsense in middle/high school. If you ever take math (e.g. physics or engineering) in college/university you'll fail. 16 / 4 ( 3 + 1 ) = 16 / 4 ( 4 ) = 16 / (4 * 4 ) .... aka distributive property... it's math. If a rule applies in one location, it applies everywhere. = 16 / ( 16 ) = 1. Your mistake and it's SAME with ALL U.S. HIGH school teachers ... is inserting a magical multiplication sign. 16 / 4 ( 3 + 1 ) DOES NOT EQUAL 16 / 4 * ( 3 + 1 ) Ask any human (who is suitably trained in math) what does 2x/2x result in? The answer is 1. However with your logic (and the same for Google) the answer is x^2. This is 100% wrong. Similarly try evaluating 3^2x ... that's not 9x ... that's 3^(2x) ... since we don't know what x is ... the expression is already in its simplest form. All of this is explained under JUXTAPOSITION. PLEASE STOP TEACHING PEMDAS. PEMDAS IS ***WRONG*** (unless you're just teaching elementary school math).

@klm2558

6 ай бұрын

​@macbain1395 PEMDAS doesn't break any rules of algebra, the interpretation people lay on expressions DO, however. In addition with the obelus, which is not a vinculum, is basically a fraction with a numerator on the left side and on the right side. Writing in text has a difference between writing in paper, which often uses a vinculum rather than an ambiguous obelus or solidus. The simple PEMDAS interpretation of the expression 16/4(3 + 1) is not breaking any rules of algebra whatsoever, since if we break 16/4 down to its multiplicative inverse, we find that we have that as the coefficient of the term (3 + 1), THEN distribute within the parentheses. That's where you went wrong on the distributive property, the coefficient of (3 + 1) is not 4, but it is 16(4^(-1)) juxtaposition is still in application regardless, you have to remember that without the parentheses to group the entire denominator, say: a/bc, as per the interpretation of a solidus, not a vinculum it goes: a/bc = (a/b)c = ac/b Algebra does not fall apart in the midst of PEMDAS, it's the overcomplication and the misunderstanding of simple mathematical perspective on the given.

@Ttyumbra

5 ай бұрын

@@macbain1395wait so for the Asvab and SAT/Act do they go according to this logic or not?

@Ttyumbra

5 ай бұрын

@@macbain1395also so use juxtaposition instead of pemdas? Or maybe you can give me the ruleset so I don’t make any mistakes?

Thank you! I was sturggling with this all day long

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

You’re very welcome! 😊

@peterthomas5792

Ай бұрын

@@mathically > I was sturggling with this all day long And you will struggle all life long if you follow PEMDAS. Learn math instead.

16÷4(3+1) You distribute 4 to whats inside the () just like you do with 2x

@johnadrianmalunes0516

10 ай бұрын

If you use a scientific calculator you will see a different answer

@wodmarach

10 ай бұрын

​@johnadrianmalunes0516 only if its not made by texas instruments...

@peterthomas5792

Ай бұрын

Exactly. It's called juxtaposed multiplication. What's 2a/2a? PEMDAS says the answer is a² The correct answer is 1. Why does the USA teach this PEMDAS nonsense?

Thank you!!!

BODMAS/PEMDAS isn't the issue here. It's how the 4(3+1) is treated. It's arguably ambiguous (though you could argue that once the brackets are worked out you lose the brackets so are left with 44 or 4×4. Treating it as 44 is daft so we are left with 4×4 and then 12÷4×4 is clearly 16.)

@peterthomas5792

Ай бұрын

No it's not. Learn about juxtaposed multiplication. The answer is 1.

@user-sy4te9kg9e

19 күн бұрын

m.kzread.info/dash/bejne/ZqxhpMWSc8yxc84.html&pp=ygUedGhlIGhvdyBhbmQgd2h5IG9mIG1hdGhlbWF0aWNz

@user-sy4te9kg9e

19 күн бұрын

Multiplicación Yuxtapuesta: m.kzread.info/dash/bejne/noB3psWaZse_oKQ.html&pp=ygUedGhlIGhvdyBhbmQgd2h5IG9mIG1hdGhlbWF0aWNz

@peterthomas5792

19 күн бұрын

> ...,though you could argue that once the brackets are worked out you lose the brackets No you don't. Once the INSIDE of the brackets are worked out, you're left with 4(4). There are STILL brackets, so they get worked out next to leave 16. Only THEN do you do multiply & divide.

Thank you soo much I really needed some help and you helped me alot!

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

Aww you’re very welcome. It’s our pleasure! 😊

thx so so so so so so so so much we are having a test about this soon and this helped me A LOT.!!!!!!!

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Aww you're so welcome, friend!!! Cheers to learning! 🥳💕🙏🏻

This is on my exam today with fractional expressions so I just need a reminder lol... nervous because I could never grasp this 😅 wish me luck on my test yall !

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

I know it’s been a minute, but hope you did well! 😊

I finally found an understandable tutorial😭😭 thanks so much

4() is implied / juxtaposition, the true ambiguity is whether juxtaposition shares the same priority as an explicit multiplication sign.

The trouble is that different countries use different methods of teaching. For me the answer is 1 because I was taught that the 4 belongs to the (3+1). For me to get the answer to be 16, the equation would need to be written like this (16÷4)(3+1)

@douglascoates7696

5 ай бұрын

Agree. The REAL point is that this statement is expressed ambiguously and that is bad maths. It needs one additional pair of () to become unambiguous. Either yours or 16÷ (4(3 +)). This statement crops up a lot on YT and I reckon its a form of clickbait.

@peterthomas5792

Ай бұрын

You were taught correctly. The expression is NOT ambiguous, the answer is 1.

Thank you. You made it easy for me to understand

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

You're so welcome! Cheers to learning, friend! 🥳💕🙏🏻

Thanks bc my teacher explain it a way that I don’t understand but u helped me because my New York State test is tomorrow wish me luck 🍀

Thank you so much now am not stressing no more 😊😃

What about the parantheses?? It should be 4(4) not 4 x 4, its going to have different results

@macbain1395

7 ай бұрын

Not according to Americans doing Common Core math! But to be clear, I agree with you. 4(4) is not the same as 4 * 4. It's just like saying 4^4 is not the same as 4*4.

@gbhxu

7 ай бұрын

@@macbain1395 You've hit the nail on the head "Americans." A lot of other countries use a different method and would get the answer as 1. 16÷4(3+1) >> 16÷(12+4) >> 16÷16 =1.

@franc4424

5 ай бұрын

@@gbhxuthat’s what I be getting on these online posts and it is such a big disagreement

You have to distribute the 4 across (3+1) 🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️. The answer is 1. PEMDAS is convention. Distribution is a mathematical law. 16÷4(3+1) = 16÷(4(4+1) = 16÷(4×4) = 1

Thank you.

I see comments that the answer is incorrect. I just wanted a summary of the order so it works for me.

Thank you this helped me out a lot

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

You’re very welcome! 😊

16/4(3+1) 16/4(4) This can be interpreted two different ways a/bc or a/b x c which basically 16/(4(4)) vs 16/4 x 4

I completely understand iT 🙌

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Yay! Cheers to learning! 😊🙌

This helped so much in fourth grade for a gifted assignment Ty so much 🥰

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

That’s so awesome to hear! We’re so glad it helped. 😊

If you rewrite this as fractions it will give you a different answer. PEMDAS does not match the way formulas are solved in engineering and mathematics books. In those books multiplication is done before division. This is a very interesting subject.

Thanksssss studying for asvab and forgot this part 😂 starting over with the basics.

Another example of why PEMDAS is only suitable for young children:- 2^^2^^3 PEMDAS evaluates it as 64 It's actually 256 PEMDAS is a primary school tool that breaks down with anything more advanced than very basic math.

OMG! Thank you thank you thank you!!! I have a math test this week and you helped me so much!!

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Whoo! Glad to hear it. 😊🙌🥳

@pinkycat28lol

6 ай бұрын

Same, I got a 105% but not from the vid, I was making sure

This is the day I’ve learned about the left to right rule. I was a algebra student and could’ve sworn my teacher skipped over this while teaching us PEMDAS. That or I have really bad memory

@deenadream

6 ай бұрын

I struggled with this for a while. I don’t believe all teachers teach the left to right rule

Why do I remember an alternate rule where you have to multiply the number in front of the parenthesis then? Seriously, Idk why I’m thinking that. Eg. In this example, 4x3 and 4x1, then add?

Thank you very much😊

Omg thanks soon so so so much this really helps me in my exams !

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

It’s our pleasure! We’re so glad it helped! 😇

left to right and the multiplication is first before the division why did you start division before multiplication?

Tysm.. i am geade 7 and my country has a special event where all schools answer their previous grades topics

Thank you. Never taught this.

But why did you use addition first? It's second to the last, before Subtraction, i didn't get the logic for this one, since you mentioned earlier that pemdas is the proper ORDER we need to follow but you didn't follow it really.

Thank you so much

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

It’s our pleasure! Thank YOU! 😊

omgggg thank you so much

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Yay! You're so welcome! Cheers to learning! 🥳💕🙏🏻

why did you do the division first than the multiplication? (but ty for helping me tho)

im originally South African so im used to just call it B O D M A S B = Brackets First [()] O = Order of Operations [x², √xyz, etc] D = Division [÷ / ½] M = Multiplication [× / *] A = Addition [+] S = Subtraction [-]

E means Exponents if you’re new to pemdas

Thanks for this! Imma find a tagalog one you are so fast at talking but you explained good! I'm a filipino!

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Aw thank your for the feedback! We’ll try to slow it down a bit in future videos. 😉😊🙏

thankyouuu sooooo much i had a math quiz and it really helped

@mathically

8 ай бұрын

You're so welcome, Joel!! We're so glad this video was helpful. Cheers to learning!! 😊💕🙏🏻

Thanks that helps

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

You’re very welcome! Thank you for watching. 😊

Parentheses Exponents Multiplication Division Addition Subtraction

@macbain1395

7 ай бұрын

Yup --- good that you know it. Now go and finish with the Parenthesis. Don't just work inside and then replace.... DO THE WHOLE PARENTHESIS!

It's 1.

1

@jamescollier3

2 жыл бұрын

you are correct

Her tutorial is wrong, the correct answer is 1 Because there is no sign of multiplication in the given. in pemdas rule, The parenthesis is also a multiplication even without a sign of multiplication but you can't change or replace it in multiplication sign. if you want to know how the answer became 1, here's the correct solution below. 16÷4(3+1) 16÷4(4) 16÷16 =1 If you confused, you can try it to solve in scientific calculator.

Perhaps you'd all be better off asking ChatGPT instead of some random KZreadr:- a) What is 16 ÷ 4(3 + 1) ChatGPT To solve the expression 16 ÷ 4(3 + 1), you need to follow the order of operations, which is often remembered by the acronym PEMDAS: Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication and Division (from left to right), and Addition and Subtraction (from left to right). So, first, you should solve what's inside the parentheses: 3 + 1 = 4 Then, you multiply: 4(4) = 16 Finally, you divide: 16 ÷ 16 = 1 So, 16 ÷ 4(3 + 1) equals 1. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conversely:- What is 16 ÷ 4 x (3 + 1) ChatGPT To correctly solve the expression 16 ÷ 4 x (3 + 1), we follow the order of operations: Parentheses: Evaluate what's inside the parentheses. Multiplication and Division (from left to right). Addition and Subtraction (from left to right). So: Inside the parentheses, we have 3 + 1 = 4. Now, we perform the multiplication and division from left to right. We first divide 16 by 4: 16 ÷ 4 = 4 Now, we multiply the result by 4: 4 x 4 = 16 So, the result of the expression 16 ÷ 4 x (3 + 1) is 16. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE THE DIFFERENCE IN PRECEDDENCE BETWEEN EXPLICIT AND IMLICIT/JUXTAPOSED MULTIPLICATION.

Where did you buy that pen😅😅

"But there's a hidden rule" "Ohbthank god she's going to mention juxtaposition" *proceeds to get the wrong answer* "Sigh"

@macbain1395

9 ай бұрын

She's clearly US educated, i.e. deficient in math. Note the way that she writes X. Lack of cursive lettering. This is literally why people need to be (i) home-schooled. (ii) foreign schooled (e.g. Europe) (iii) have to retake math for science/engineering courses.

@bbernyy64

9 ай бұрын

I was not only thinking the same thing, but was also very relieved when I saw this as the top comment. Thank you 👍

@coinyfrombfdireal

8 ай бұрын

​@@macbain1395bruh we landed the first rocket on the moon

@gbhxu

7 ай бұрын

@@coinyfrombfdireal Or did you?

@deenadream

6 ай бұрын

So wait. This is taught differently in other countries? I’m in the USA and this is definitely how we’re taught in school

Still don’t make sense shouldn’t divide go first since it’s first on (pemdas) or do you go from left to right what’s on the problem

How did the multiplication sign come from ?

@kyle--859

7 ай бұрын

Parentheses without a sign is multiplication

what is that down symbol called ???

Thank sow much

I like your teaching

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much! 😆

Gotta love the asians, teaching me the best math

@macbain1395

Жыл бұрын

except that she's american and as a result, she's wrong!

@pr3ttysh4de

10 ай бұрын

@@macbain1395proof?

@coinyfrombfdireal

8 ай бұрын

​@@macbain1395lmao whats your problem with americans?

@macbain1395

7 ай бұрын

@@coinyfrombfdireal They are the modern day British. Self-righteous and ignorant of others. Yes I realize that's a generalization but if it's true for close to 50% ... it's relatively good one. More importantly, they and more relevant to this conversation: 1.) They don't study mathematics to a high enough level 2.) They insist, without even listening, to the other point of view. 3.) Because someone taught them PEMDAS (and then later changed it to Order Of Operations), they think that the world followed. 4.) They spread LIES about it being formalized in 1917 or 14 or whatever -- the truth is that there is NO AGREED CONVENTION ___BUT___ if you bother to ready ISO-80000-2 it clearly says that expressions must be written such that misunderstanding is not possible, i.e. CONVENTION MUST BE AGREED PRIOR. And so on. 5.) Americans are now of the opinion that Google is the answer. Google can be wrong and DEFINITELY IS wrong ... just ask it to calculate "5!!" ... then look up a math book. The answer is 15 but NOT according to Google. 6.) Yes you went to the moon. And yes you were first. Big whoop. Half your population believes it's a hoax and 40% (I think) continues to think the world is flat. Do I really need to go on? If I was arguing with a learned mathematician, sure. But this is tik-tok/youtube gen-pop with no grounding in anything except "I wanna be rich and I don't want to go anything".

Thanks 🥰😊

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

You’re very welcome! 😊🙌

No you are wrong A/Q pemdas Ans is 1 and A/Q bodmas ans is 16

@jamescollier3

2 жыл бұрын

Right, she completely ignores the implied multiplication. But she's so confidently wrong. lol

@nkonyeluonuegbu354

8 ай бұрын

I don't get it

@manjeetyadav7333

8 ай бұрын

1

@macbain1395

7 ай бұрын

Actually BODMAS is also 1. You have to finish with the evaluation of the parenthesis.

Thanks

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

You’re very welcome! 😊

I wanna know when I am gonna use these mathematical equations in my life time🤷‍♀️. Who created this🤯

I wish I had a mechanical pencil like that

Math is easy of you have good teachers😃

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Aw yes, definitely! We’ve been fortunate to have had some good teachers ourselves. Thank you so much. 😊🥰🙌

I love itttttt🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰

@mathically

Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much! 😊

More plzzzz🥺

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

You got it! 😉

Omg thank you sooo much, i really need this, i didnt really understand this before, this is on my exam this thursday, thank you again♡♡♡♡♡♡♡

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

You're so welcome! We're so happy this video was helpful. Cheers to learning, friend!! 😊💕🙏🏻

Can you do BODMAS

Juxtaposition is needed

🙆🏾‍♀️ wow, ty.

@mathically

11 ай бұрын

You're so welcome, friend! Cheers to learning! 😊💕🙏🏻

I’m in 3rd. Grade and I know this

Tysmmmmm

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

You're so welcome, friend! Cheers to learning!! 🥳💕🙏🏻

When do you use the distributive properties?

@kyle--859

7 ай бұрын

You can use, but it just adds unnecessary extra work. It is necessary to use it when the operation in the parentheses can't be done (for example the addition of two different variables)

Me be like when teacher explaining: 🤔hah

What's BODMAS then??

Y’all gonna fail any advanced math classes watching this. You just completely eradicated the parentheses and changed it

@sir_cookie5427

9 ай бұрын

4(4) is the same thing as 4x4. 4(4) may have parentheses BUT it’s outside the parentheses. It’s just means multiple.

@CreatorHouseVlogs

9 ай бұрын

@@sir_cookie5427 dude it it was the same exact thing they wouldn’t need to add it in math. You have to get rid (GET RID) of parentheses first before you start the problem gd

you can't prove why I should calculate from right to left! you also can't prove if it's a simple divide or a fraction bar. But I can prove to you that in some countries it is calculated that way and in other countries it is calculated differently

WOW THE ANSWER IS 16 EVEN THERE'S SIXTEEN!

thank you for saying what idiots on the internet could not

PEMDAS PEMDAS OHHHHH

See, this is why I hate Math teachers. They taught me the PEMDAS rule, but they forgot to mention the “hidden rule”. So I’ve been doing it wrong for the past 30 years!

Bidmas

@khione8044

2 жыл бұрын

@shrëk BIDMAS and PEMDAS are the same thing. 😉

Is this acceptable?

Yay my ans is correct

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Sweet! 🥳💯

Wrong. PEMDAS is only fit for primary school level maths. The answer is 1. Learn about the priority of juxtaposed multiplications. PEMDAS says 2a/2a = a² But 2a/2a = 1. Ask anyone who actually USES math professionally instead of just learning ridiculous rules by rote. THIS is the video you should be watching kzread.info/dash/bejne/noB3psWaZse_oKQ.html

34 i think 😅😅

And that's exactly NOT what mathematicians, physicists and engineers do... and also all math books or papers. Also it's not what HP calculators do. PEMDAS is not the only rule. PEMDAS is used to teach kids. For mathematicians, the answer is 1. And also for my HP 10s.

@wodmarach

9 ай бұрын

From what I remember TI and cheaper calcs from certain companies (that use TI chips) use pure PEMDAS but even they have a big old warning in their manuals to add extra brackets around implied multiplication to get the correct answer

We have bodmas bruh

I've never heard of pemdas

16

or boadmas

Bodmas

16÷4(3+1)=? 16+4(4) 16÷16=0

@Sleezmania52

Ай бұрын

That would be 1

The answer is 2

please excuse my dear aunt sally

@mathically

10 ай бұрын

Yes!!! 😊🙌🥳

you write how you doing

80% people got this right. You don't.

your PEMDAS but our is PMDAS

I don't know what you are taking about😅

But I learned B o d m a s!?

Omg! You are so wrong. Substitute x for any of the numbers and solve for it. You will discover your mistake. Also the 4(3+1) the 4 is actually part of the gge bracket. And you should distribute the 4 through the parenthesis while dealing with the parenthesis. When learning the intricacies of upper algebra, you forgot the intricacies of PEMDAS. The parenthesis, also has hidden rules.

@Greepled

11 ай бұрын

lol your wrong

@RisingwoodsGal

11 ай бұрын

@@Greepled you're

@wodmarach

10 ай бұрын

​@@Greepledjuxtapositions come before MD

@BigstickNick

6 ай бұрын

That’s what I was thinking

@klm2558

6 ай бұрын

No it is not wrong, what you did was essentially alter the expression itself by placing a non-existent set of parentheses. Take note that what is separating the terms is not a vinculum, instead an obelus. Implicit multiplication does not supercede any of that sort, as multiplication is one of the same as division. Written with a solidus: 16/4(3 + 1) = 16(1/4)(3 + 1) = 16(4^(-1))(3 + 1) [written 16/4 with its multiplicative inverse] then, and only then will you distribute. (16(3))/4 + (16(1))/4 = (48 + 16)/4 = 4(12 + 4)/4 = 12 + 4 = 16 You cannot say that the answer is otherwise now, that would mean you are contradicting the commutative property of multiplication, in which any rearrangement, order, modification of equality, stands no regard over the expression. Let us now prove this by deriving the initial expression with the different answers. Your answer: 1 = 1 16/16 = 1 16/(4(4)) = 1 16/(4(3 + 1)) = 1: not the initial expression; excess of parentheses. 16 = 16 16(4)/4 = 16 16/4(4) = 16 16/4(3 + 1) = 16: the correct and initial expression.

I didn't understand nothing she said your saying too fast