Any maths teachers on this forum?
Posted by: mista h on 29 April 2014
A chance for Richard to make a comeback !!
| 1. | If 7 is equal to 13 then what is 16 equal to? |
in a base 4 system it would equal 40.
But quite often these sorts of questions are as pointless as the various answers.
Surely it would equal 100 in base 4
I hate these questions, written only to catch people out. My view is that brackets should always be used to make it clear. .........
..................... my recollection is that i would have got a right telling off from my maths teachers if I wrote something out so badly....
+1
Nah. Brackets are only required when the default priority of operations needs to be changed. For example, if you have to add two numbers before multiplying the result.
I thought a billion was a million million, but the USA couldn't cope with that so it became a thousand mill.
That's also my understanding. I just hope we (the rest of the world) never adopt their useless and confusing month-day-year format for dates.
BODMAS
A new acronym for the Forum?
(Brackets over division, then multiplication, addition and substraction)
That's the one Vlad, it was lurking out of reach in lump that serves as a brian. 
A chance for Richard to make a comeback !!
| 1. | If 7 is equal to 13 then what is 16 equal to? |
in a base 4 system it would equal 40.
But quite often these sorts of questions are as pointless as the various answers.
Surely it would equal 100 in base 4
Oopps. Spot on. Not so trivial after all !
I hate these questions, written only to catch people out. My view is that brackets should always be used to make it clear. .........
..................... my recollection is that i would have got a right telling off from my maths teachers if I wrote something out so badly....
+1
Nah. Brackets are only required when the default priority of operations needs to be changed. For example, if you have to add two numbers before multiplying the result.
I think that's what I said in my first post on this thread. And I also added that I temporarily put (superfluous) brackets in place, since it tends to help me keep an eye on which bits are which.
I thought a billion was a million million, but the USA couldn't cope with that so it became a thousand mill.
That's also my understanding. I just hope we (the rest of the world) never adopt their useless and confusing month-day-year format for dates.
+1
Except for 9/11.................
BODMAS
A new acronym for the Forum?
(Brackets over division, then multiplication, addition and substraction)
The 'O' actually stands for 'other' (in my world). For example a trig function or power/indices calculation. Some people use BIDMAS. The 'I' standing for indices. I prefer BODMAS as the user is not limited.
Where would we be without hierarchy?
Best get back to Y8's Trig homework.....
By convention:-
brackets
Multiply; divide
add; subtract
Usually best to add barckets temporarily.
(4*4)+(4*4)+4-(4*4)
16 + 16 +4 -16 = 20
Within the "innermost" brackets, follow the order below...
Multiply and Divide in the order they appear (i.e. Do NOT multiply everything before dividing), then
Add and Subtract in the order they appear (i.e. Do not add everything before subtracting)
This resolves the bracketed expression to a number
Move to next most "innermost" set of brackets and repeat until all brackets are gone.
Repeat with just the remaining numbers to get final answer...
I thought a billion was a million million, but the USA couldn't cope with that so it became a thousand mill.
That's also my understanding. I just hope we (the rest of the world) never adopt their useless and confusing month-day-year format for dates.
+1
Except for 9/11.................
I don't use that expression.
24/7?
All at 6's and 7's!
To be "at sixes and sevens" is a British English idiom used to describe a state of confusion or disarray.
The phrase probably derives from a complicated dice game called "hazard".[1] It is thought that the expression was originally"to set on cinq and six"[1] (from the French numerals for five and six). These were considered to be the riskiest numbers to shoot for (to "set on"), and those who tried for them were considered careless or confused.
PJason.
similar to "all at sea".
24/7?
Always is nicer!
A baker's dozen (12) is actually 13.
It's widely believed that this phrase originated from the practice of medieval English bakers giving an extra loaf when selling a dozen in order to avoid being penalised for selling short weight.
Jason.
"My better half (1/2)."
This term wasn't originally restricted to referring to one's spouse as we use it now, but to a dear friend. It was used that way by the Roman poet Horace and later by Statius. The allusion then was to a friend so dear that he/she was more than half of a person's being. That meaning persists, although these days, if the term is used seriously rather than sarcastically, it is generally considered to mean 'the superior half of a married couple'. That is, better in quality rather than in quantity.
Sir Philip Sidney was the first to put into print the use of this phrase to mean spouse, in The Countesse of Pembrokes Arcadia, 1580:
"My deare, my better halfe (sayd hee) I find I must now leaue thee."
Jason.
"Dressed to the nines (9's)"
The phrase's derivation involve associating the number nine with clothing in some way. One theory has it that tailors used nine yards of material to make a suit (or, according to some authors, a shirt). The more material you had the more kudos you accrued, although nine yards seems generous even for a fop.
Jason.
This is ones for George.
"Three score and ten (10)."
The span of a life. In the days that this was coined that was considered to be seventy years.
Threescore used to be used for sixty, in the way that we still use a dozen for twelve, and (occasionally) score for twenty. It has long since died out in that usage but is still remembered in this phrase. Threescore goes back to at least 1388, as in this from John Wyclif's Bible, Leviticus 12, at that date:
"Thre scoor and sixe daies."
There are numerous uses of 'threescore' in the Bible. Most of them refer to its simple meaning as the number sixty, for example:
"...threescore and ten bullocks, an hundred rams, and two hundred lambs: all these were for a burnt offering to the Lord."
There is a use of it that refers to the span of our lives, in Psalms 90:
The days of our years are threescore years and ten;
and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years,
yet is their strength labor and sorrow;
for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.
As with many other Biblical phrases, this was picked up by Shakespeare. In Macbeth, 1605, we have:
Threescore and ten I can remember well:
Within the volume of which time I have seen
Hours dreadful and things strange; but this sore night
Hath trifled former knowings.
It's an odd fact that, although Shakespeare took numerous phrases and examples of imagery from the Bible, the word Bible doesn't appear in any of his plays.
Jason.
Very drunk.
Don't be taken aback to hear that sheets aren't sails, as landlubbers might expect, but ropes (or occasionally, chains). These are fixed to the lower corners of sails, to hold them in place. If three sheets are loose and blowing about in the wind then the sails will flap and the boat will lurch about like a drunken sailor.
The phrase is these days more often given as 'three sheets to the wind', rather than the original 'three sheets in the wind'. The earliest printed citation that I can find is in Pierce Egan's Real Life in London, 1821:
"Old Wax and Bristles is about three sheets in the wind."
Sailors at that time had a sliding scale of drunkenness; three sheets was the falling over stage; tipsy was just 'one sheet in the wind', or 'a sheet in the wind's eye'. An example appears in the novel The Fisher's Daughter, by Catherine Ward, 1824:
"Wolf replenished his glass at the request of Mr. Blust, who, instead of being one sheet in the wind, was likely to get to three before he took his departure."
Jason.
This would normally only be written by a crap computer programmer (or a new graduate) and if anybody working for me wrote something like that he or she would get a kick up the arse. You have to write code to be supported by the unfortunate soul coming after you and brackets make it all so much easier.
Rule number one in our programming guidelines used to be "Tricky programming is out" i.e. no ego trips.
This would normally only be written by a crap computer programmer (or a new graduate) and if anybody working for me wrote something like that he or she would get a kick up the arse. You have to write code to be supported by the unfortunate soul coming after you and brackets make it all so much easier.
Rule number one in our programming guidelines used to be "Tricky programming is out" i.e. no ego trips.
Tricky programming is more often achieved by writing overly long and complex formuale into single lines, where a more logical arrangement of shorter formulae is indicated, brackets or not.
For me, the keys to clear code are logical overall structure, meaningful variable names, digestible (short!) pieces/lines, grouping where logical and spaces where required, and adequate annotation (simply tell those that come after you what each section of code is trying to do). People familiar with arithmetic can typically parse equations on the basis of the standard and universal rules without the need for redundant symbols.
Honestly, the orginal equation posted by the OP is not complex, nor misleading to anyone with even basic skills in arithmetic.
As soon as I saw the problem, the word Bodmas came to mind a trick drummed in to us at school about 60 years ago and was well used for many years and is still valid in spreadsheets and calculators.
Along with "Victor Borger Got My Old Rollei" the main colours of the spectrum
((can't see the point in placing brackets around numbers) (when not required)) ((as rediculous as placing brackets around words) (don't you think)) (Even if it does clarify matters) 
Does anybody know the formula for the area of a circle?