Gates Bankrolling Educational Org That Says Math is Racist

a reply to: Edumakated

The British apparently have a different school.

But like you, my husband and I both arrive at one. Once you start doing higher level math, division becomes a fraction, so everything one side of the line is the numerator, and everything on the other is the denominator. You would solve the math to make your denominator a number you can divide with before anything else.

From what little calculus level math I recall you reduce your equation down to as little you can get in both your numerator and denominator and if you can single digits, then you divide. But that almost never happens. Ultimately, you want to remove either the fraction altogether and end up a single variable on one side or the other.

a reply to: Edumakated

I only know of one way to do it. Add the parenthesis first... you get 4. then 2*4=8. So 8 / 8 = 1.

So does that mean that there is only one answer? Nope.

The answer of the equation depends on something external to natural and pure mathematics. A certain rule must be taught and be applied to come up with the "right answer". Otherwise, you get a totally different answer.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

And when we write "Let's eat grandma," that can be interpreted two different ways as well because it's punctuated ambiguously. That doesn't mean it's some kind of revolution in English and that the language is evolving or means different things than it does. It just means that someone wrote a poorly punctuated sentence, and in this case, someone wrote a poorly written, ambiguous equation.

8 / 2 (2+2) = Velveeta Cheese, ask Sheldon Cooper the genius kid, I copied his answer.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Now with the way you wrote it, the answer is 1 / 2 or 0.5. Caught be the edit! You changed that 4+4.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yeah, it's all Velveeta Cheese any way.

Basically, the presentation is all about whether or not the parenthetical goes into the numerator or the denominator.



Instead of me trying to type math equations, I'll let you deal with Teikiatsu's chicken scratch.

Better bracketing or simply presenting the problem in a fraction notation would clear this up.

a reply to: ketsuko

Quit yo mathematical racist talk whitey!

I told you all the answer be's VELVEETA CHEESE M-F'er. Now shut the hell up befo I cap yo ass.

Who would have figured that after centuries of math that have done everything from sail ships across the ocean to putting humans on the moon would all of a suddenly need a change because some extreme group of people think that maths excludes someone.

It takes a village to raise an idiot.

a reply to: wdkirk

Isn't collectivism awesome? No one can be saved if we can't all be saved. No one can learn math if we can't all learn math.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Basically, the presentation is all about whether or not the parenthetical goes into the numerator or the denominator.

Instead of me trying to type math equations, I'll let you deal with Teikiatsu's chicken scratch.

Better bracketing or simply presenting the problem in a fraction notation would clear this up.

Great! So he rephrased the question. What's the answer?

When I typed the equation into my search engine's calculator,


here's the way it reads the equation; 8 /2(2+2)=,, and here's what I get.



So what is the "right answer"?

It even worse, 1+1= 2.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
If it looks weird, sounds weird, tastes weird, then it’s just plain simple weird.

He hits 2 out of 3 straight off the bat. The other one? Well I’ve yet to meet him, so unable to provide an answer on that....yet.

I'd rather eat rattlesnake than see how that megalomaniac tastes.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

There is only 1 answer.

16.

It's probably already been said, but I'd like to add that this all just multiplies the division that is racism. That's my takeaway on it at least. The remainder of my thoughts on the subject will just subtract from the conversation.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I already told you - it is an ambiguously written equation. There are two different ways to perform it depending on how you were taught order of operations, but given the math knowledge you have demonstrated thus far, I wouldn't get you to understand that. However, the confusion arises out of what it essentially a difference in punctuation, not a difference in how you interpret any of the concepts of the fundamental math itself.

No matter what order you perform the basic functions of the equation, the numbers always interact the same way.

2+2 in each way of doing the equation is always 4; no one doing it says that it actually is 5 according to their understanding of the math. In either equation, you can do 8/2 as a step, and it will always equal 4 as well. The only thing affecting the final outcome is what order you do the steps in, and that is pretty well defined by how you see the problem as illustrated by the written diagram.

Is (2+2) to be part of the numerator or the denominator and the way the equation is written does not tell us this which is why it's controversy opening the door to two schools of order of operation to render their answers.

Btw, Sooks, for you calculator, you also rewrote the equation by adding the "x" order. You chose the second of the two notations my husband wrote out.

originally posted by: myselfaswell
a reply to: Sookiechacha

There is only 1 answer.

16.

It's probably already been said, but I'd like to add that this all just multiplies the division that is racism. That's my takeaway on it at least. The remainder of my thoughts on the subject will just subtract from the conversation.

Is there? Is the answer "16"? Or, is it "1"?

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Mrs. Jones has 2 oranges, and she picks 2 more. How many oranges does she have now?

No. None of her oranges is a quark.

What's the answer?

1...

I only know of one way to do it. Add the parenthesis first... you get 4. then 2*4=8. So 8 / 8 = 1.

Maths be qrazy!

a reply to: ketsuko

There are two different ways to perform it

Sorry mate, but that is incorrect, there is only one correct answer. The confusion seems to be the absence of the "x".

8 / 2(2+2) can only be 8 / 2 * (2+2). It cannot be computed any other way

It cannot be interpreted as 8/(2(2+2)).

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Is it?

Yes, yes it is.

a reply to: JAGStorm

The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so.

I found their first significant math mistake, which comes from their BS failure to educate either themselves or the minorities they claim to care about.

In the quoted material above, the proper text should read as follows:

The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even [much less] MORE so.

That's MORE rather than 'much less'. #ing genii... They haven't covered the difference between addition & subtraction, so pity the poor worthy causes who have lost grant money to these fools. The Gates's are clearly inane & despotic psychopaths, and perhaps a helpful asteroid could locate their money & obliterate it, so they can do less harm than they clearly intend for the world.