• Don’t move the goalposts

      I didn’t. You’re the one who has been desperately trying to make a False Equivalence argument between a(b+c) and a(bc)² 🙄

      I’ve posted textbooks showing that “solving brackets” only applies to the inside,

      No you haven’t. A college refresher isn’t a Maths textbook, and I already pointed out to you that they don’t mention The Distributive Law at all, unlike, you know, high school Maths textbooks 🙄

      distribution is part of multiplication

      And the high school Maths textbooks I posted prove you are wrong about that 🙄

      and optional

      And the high school Maths textbooks I posted prove you are wrong about that too, 🙄 unless you think “optional” is a valid interpretation of what “must” means 😂

      You’ve said yourself your magic rule is taught in highschool,

      Yep

      so a refresher course in college would never ignore it

      And yet you proved that they did in fact forget about it 🙄

      Now instead of giving weak excuses

      they say to person who has been backed up by every textbook they posted so far 😂

      provide your part of the proof.

      Just scroll back dude - they’re all still there, like here for example.

      And I’m not talking about multiplication

      Well that’ll be a nice change then 😂

      I want to see anywhere where a distribution is given precedence over an exponent

      Because you are hell bent on making a False Equivalence argument between a(b+c) and a(bc)². I don’t care dude. there is no exponent in the meme. I’ll take that as an admission that you are wrong about a(b+c) then.

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Who are you talking to?

        All I said was: If 5(4)2 is 5*16, like this college math textbook shows, then 2(8)2 is 2*64.

        Every published example will agree this is how it works. None, at any level of education, will agree with your bullshit.