tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post7414938345795241007..comments2024-03-19T07:30:55.288-04:00Comments on Curmudgeon: PEMDAS is unfair? I can't believe I read that.Curmudgeonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04323026187622872114noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post-56297118094740491712014-01-30T22:24:23.067-05:002014-01-30T22:24:23.067-05:00I did notice that only the left to right order of ...I did notice that only the left to right order of MD and AS were called "truly" arbitrary, so maybe the entire PEMDAS order wasn't being called arbitrary.<br /><br />But in that case, I think the left to right rule is to minimize student errors. Even if they don't know that subtraction and division are "really" addition and multiplication (so PEMDAS is really PEMA), they still have some freedom when working with something like 8-2+1. It's entirely valid to do the addition first, as long as you know to actually do -2+1 = -1, and still end up with the correct answer of 8-1=7.<br /><br />PEMDAS itself isn't the problem. The problem is teachers who don't quite get it, think it's a stupid rule handed down from above, and get angry at a straw man--or rather, a straw Aunt Sally.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post-53811881265762484072014-01-30T21:23:41.566-05:002014-01-30T21:23:41.566-05:00I used to think that PEMDAS was "arbitrary&qu...I used to think that PEMDAS was "arbitrary" as well, but try writing a polynomial, say 500-16t^2 for the height of some dropped object after t seconds, using another order. Let's try PASMDE: it's 500-(16(t^2)), if I haven't managed to confuse even myself with my new ordering (or "SAR" to the inexplicably angry math teachers out there)...the point is that there is actually some thought behind the order.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post-61087742961835125872014-01-30T08:21:19.153-05:002014-01-30T08:21:19.153-05:00Well, heck! why bother with the periodic table of...Well, heck! why bother with the periodic table of elements? there are other ways to represent those atoms. And why go into Linnaean taxonomy? I think mice look sort of like armadilloes, they must be part of the same genus. Cripes!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post-13164428772690087972012-01-13T06:09:53.857-05:002012-01-13T06:09:53.857-05:00What are you saying aboot me kilt?What are you saying aboot me kilt?Curmudgeonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04323026187622872114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post-41296527749743200122012-01-13T05:35:47.084-05:002012-01-13T05:35:47.084-05:00It'd srbitrary that we think men should wear p...It'd srbitrary that we think men should wear pants and women dresses - maybewe should change that? Or the rules of grammar? or heck, that 2 means 2? We could change everything.<br /><br />It wouldn't change the way some of my students understand math but it sure would confuse the rest of us.Ricochethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12594506449363717006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705078887057341738.post-76931850127547882752012-01-12T20:09:02.770-05:002012-01-12T20:09:02.770-05:00That's pretty appalling.
I wonder if they a...That's pretty appalling. <br /><br />I wonder if they also think it's unfair that spelling is standardized? ... Probably they do, which is a position I find utterly baffling: every time I try to read something (like Spenser) from back before spelling was standardized I feel quite grateful that it is--spelling rules may not always make much sense, but it is much faster to read when the words are spelled in the way you are used to, rather than having to sound out each one to get it from everyone's idiosyncratic phonetic spelling (even though it requires me to look up the spelling of idiosyncratic).LSquared32https://www.blogger.com/profile/00858524638866166691noreply@blogger.com