Nowhere in your “proof” screenshots does it say anything about distribution being part of the brackets step

Which step is first? Brackets. What do they do first in 5(36)/9? The Brackets.

What does the other textbook do with bc? Puts it in Brackets. Which step is first in order of operations? Brackets 🙄 What do they end that page with? “those who study algebra are required to make their calculations conform to these laws”. You seriously need to work on your comprehension that I need to explicitly spell out to you what the textbooks say

Distribution is a method that can help solve equations

The Property is. The Law is a rule which literally must be obeyed, when solving expressions, as per Maths textbooks 🙄

it isn’t required

Yes it is! That's why it's a Law 😂

If you have 2(3+5) you’re free to solve it as 23+25 or as 2*8

Nope, neither

1/2(3+5)=1/(6+10)

1/2x3+2x5=3/2+10 WRONG ANSWER

1/2x8=8/2=4 WRONG ANSWER

Welcome to why it must be in brackets, as per Maths textbooks 🙄

That is because juxtaposition means multiplication and nothing else

says person who can't cite any Maths textbook that says that. Nope! It means it's a Term/Product, the result of a Multiplication (or Factorisation), and nothing else...

Note that it never used the word Multiplication at all in that definition 🙄

Math textbooks almost universally will either use clear brackets or simply write divisions in 2 lines

or an obelus or slash on one line

which avoids the confusion altogether

Only people who don't remember the rules of Maths are confused about it. Students have no trouble with it.

Maths is so much more malleable and abstract than what you think it is

No it isn't, as per Maths textbooks

You really do not understand maths as well as you think you do

says someone who doesn't understand it at all

just to be told “nope! That’s just how it is!” with no further thinking at all

Just as well I'm their teacher then, hey? 😂 I showed you the textbooks, and you refused to look at them

A lot of maths is chosen

Nope! Only the notation.

So long as there not being contradictions or paradoxes, the formulation of a form of math is valid

You mean so long as it obeys the laws of nature

Which is why you have different forms of maths with different rules

But we don't have different rules, only different notations. The rules of Maths are universal

And you really could use some more humility

says person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks

it’s obnoxious when you act all so high and mighty and arrogant,

says person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks

with no interest in questioning your assumptions

there aren't any. All the rules of Maths are explicitly spelt out in Maths textbooks, not to mention several of which are easy to prove.

Devolving into ridiculing the person you’re discussing with

Like the person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks

told clearly “I chose this.”?

No-one chose it. There are even several species of animals that know how to count! 😂 It's a universal law

You are making your arguments effectively unfalsifiable by just going “Nuh uh” all the time

Just as well I also provide the proof in the form of Maths textbooks. Oh wait, you keep refusing to look at them! 😂

Get some humility

says person who refuses to look in Maths textbooks

learn a bit about the foundations of maths.

says person who knows nothing about it. Makes up fanciful stories like it was "chosen" when nature proves otherwise

See for yourself what actually is the foundation

It's Arithmetic. Even some animals know how to do Arithmetic, none of them know how to do set theory! 😂

And, spoiler, it’s not a high school textbook.

That's right, it's a Primary school textbook 😂

Hopefully I do not need to tell you how concepts are simplified for younger students

And yet you still manage to not understand them 🙄

instead of overwhelming them with the complete knowledge of a subject

Welcome to why Algebra isn't taught until Year 7 😂

What do you mean? I replied to it…

Where you, yet again, ignored that I told you what you said is wrong, as per Maths textbooks

Yes, it is

No it isn't 😂

Quote the part where I said you didn’t.

The part where you said to leave it out of the mnemonic "It should be limited - like Orders - to only Multiplication and Addition"

They are the same.

Nope. 2/2 is not the same as 2*½. Do you need glasses or something??

How is that “having it the wrong way around”?

Because 2-2 came first, before we started using Brackets in Maths, by several hundred years

What does that have to do with the topic at hand?

You glibly ignoring the history and rules of Maths 🙄

No, they’re not

Still wrong 😂

Mnemonic without understanding what you’re doing

That's EXACTLY what the mnemonics are for! 😂 Don't need to understand it, just follow the steps

Which is why people get confused and argue online that you must do addition before subtraction

No-one gets confused or angry about that. 😂 There are textbooks that specifically teach to do it that way

or the other way around, depending on what the mnemonic they learned was

I have never seen any textbook say to do Subtraction before Addition, everyone is taught Addition first

Understanding that subtraction is just the addition of a negative number solves this problem

Understanding that you can do them in any order proves there is no problem 😂

Yes, the math textbook says exactly what I said, that it’s a multiplication

Nope, they say it's Brackets...

5(36)=(5x36) <== Brackets

bc=(3x4) <== Brackets

There’s no mention of it being a separate operation taking precedence

It's part of the Brackets step. I have no idea what "separate operation" you're talking about

The parentheses in your example are added for clarity

Nope. They are there because The Distributive Law requires them. "those who study algebra are required to make their calculations conform to these laws".

Whether you give priority to juxtapositions is a

A literal Law of Maths. See textbook.

the consensus being to just use parenthesis around when writing in a single line to avoid confusion.

No it isn't. You won't find any Maths textbook that says that.

However, there is no distribution step taking precedence

There is the Brackets step, including Distribution, taking precedence, as per Maths textbooks 🙄

as you mentioned

As the textbooks mention

the whole debate centers around whether the writer was too lazy to add parenthesis

The only debate is by people like you ignoring what is taught in Maths textbooks.

Go tell Wikipedia about that, not me

I'm telling you, the person pretending that it's mathematically valid information

It’s a community you can join

Yep, and be defeated, just like the Maths Professor Rick Norwood was, repeatedly.

You very clearly feel very strongly about it.

Maths textbooks, yes, which you keep ignoring

Talking to me about it isn’t going to change anything

And you talking about it isn't going to change that you are wrong

It’s funny that you define “ignore” as “not doing what you tell someone to”

Nope, I didn't.

because by that definition you’ve been ignoring me too

I'm ignoring the person failing to cite Maths textbooks, yes, that's correct.

Go edit the article if you feel this strongly

Go read what I said about what happens when ACTUAL MATHS PROFESSORS have tried to do EXACTLY THAT 🙄

How did I let you rope me into honestly trying to get through to you?

Gaslighters can't gaslight Maths teachers about Maths. You should know that by now

I called all of this from a mile off

That you were going to ignore Maths textbooks? I called that too 😂

you did exactly what I said

Nope. You never said I was going to prove you wrong

while insisting you weren’t

I've been doing the same thing I always do - proving you wrong with Maths textbooks 😂

respond “tExTbOoK!”

The question is, why do you refuse to look in any?

I never should’ve edited what the first reply said in full:

You never should've commented at all gaslighter

Fuck off.

says person in an admission of defeat

I know. I was clowning

Ok, fair enough. Some people seriously believe completely wrong things. A smiley goes a long way to showing intent

Distribution is “effectively” multiplication

No it isn't, it's Brackets. a(b+c)=(ab+ac) <== Brackets Now solve (ab+ac), or do you think that (8-5) is subtraction and not brackets? 😂 It's actually the reverse process to Factorising, whereas Multiplication is the reverse operation to Division - not even remotely the same thing.

othing you say, nothing you point to, could possibly change that,

says person ignoring Maths textbooks 😂

because they will always get the same answer

No they don't! 😂 That's why it's a Law

1/a(b+c)=1/(ab+ac)

1/ax(b+c)=(b+c)/a

Oops! (b+c) went from being in the denominator to being in the numerator, leading to WRONG ANSWER 😂 Welcome to why we have The Distributive Law

if getting the right answer is all that makes two things the same

No it isn't, but that's the first thing which has to happen. See previous point where they aren't even the same answer, therefore one of them is wrong

shut the fuck up

says person still refusing to look in Maths textbooks 🙄

The “mysterious” they is HerelAm, the person I was replying to you ninny

The person who couldn't even manage to get 10-1+1 correct when doing addition first 😂

The issue normally with these “trick” questions

There's no "trick" - it's a straight-out test of Maths knowledge.

the ambiguous nature of that division sign

Nothing ambiguous about it. The Term on the left divided by the Term on the right.

A common mistake is to think division is prioritised above multiplication

It's not a mistake. You can do them in any order you want.

when it actually has the same priority

Which means you can do them in any order