Poll: Lack of basic mathmatical skills
- Thread starter barbzilla
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I don't like the acronyms, they suggest multiplication becomes before division (or the other way around) and addition before subtraction. So people who learnt it as PEDMAS will do it differently than people who learnt PEMDAS. All the maths teachers I had were reluctant to mention the acronym as they believed we would remember the mnemonic, and forget that multiplication and division have equal priority.
The "true" order of operations would be
Parenthesis
Indices
Multiplication and Division going left to right
Addition and Subtraction going left to right.
As for my education, I'm currently doing second year mathematics as part of my Chemistry/Physics double major. So I do use it in my day to day life in that regard.
The "true" order of operations would be
Parenthesis
Indices
Multiplication and Division going left to right
Addition and Subtraction going left to right.
As for my education, I'm currently doing second year mathematics as part of my Chemistry/Physics double major. So I do use it in my day to day life in that regard.
I do hate pointless terminology of maths. It makes it more complicated than it actually is and makes the person who understands it get a false sense of intellectual superiority.
I think maths is important especially if you play video games.
On branch of maths that often gets misunderstood is statistics. People fall into common traps of:
a) A 60% chance to block + another 60% chance = 100% to block.
NO. It's 60% plus 60% of the remaining 40% to fail. So the answer is 84% chance to block. It is closer to 100% than 60%, but it's still 16% away.
b) Reducing effectiveness on stacking random effect chance, crit. It is true that by stacking crit chance, you will do more damage, and the damage will increase flatly consistently. But what people don't consider is % damage increase.
Going from 1% crit to 3% crit gives a lot more extra damage than 67% crit to 69% crit. As a result ideally you shouldn't want to exceed a 50% chance to crit.
c) Understanding the probability of random drops. An example is the Reins of the Ravenlord in WoW (a mount). It had like a 4% drop chance? You could only do the thing which gave a chance of it dropping once per day.
It was correct to assume that statistically you had a better chance of obtaining it within the first 25 days then any days after that.
Unfortunately, when it came to 'coming back the next day', some people believe that magically they had a greater chance of getting the mount based on the facts of the first day. They thought that they will get it by x days. No. Sadly and depressingly, every-time you return and kill the boss, it's a fresh 4% chance and a fresh 25 days FROM THAT NEW TIME.
Statistics are constantly misunderstood by humans beings who subconsciously believe in an aspect of fate or luck. At the end of the day statistics are about perspective.
You can make a prediction in the past that stays true. But it can conflict with a fresh prediction today. But regardless, the past prediction is still correct. Statistics are something which I doubt the human mind can ever fully grasp. I am guilty of misunderstanding statistics in everyday settings myself.
I think maths is important especially if you play video games.
On branch of maths that often gets misunderstood is statistics. People fall into common traps of:
a) A 60% chance to block + another 60% chance = 100% to block.
NO. It's 60% plus 60% of the remaining 40% to fail. So the answer is 84% chance to block. It is closer to 100% than 60%, but it's still 16% away.
b) Reducing effectiveness on stacking random effect chance, crit. It is true that by stacking crit chance, you will do more damage, and the damage will increase flatly consistently. But what people don't consider is % damage increase.
Going from 1% crit to 3% crit gives a lot more extra damage than 67% crit to 69% crit. As a result ideally you shouldn't want to exceed a 50% chance to crit.
c) Understanding the probability of random drops. An example is the Reins of the Ravenlord in WoW (a mount). It had like a 4% drop chance? You could only do the thing which gave a chance of it dropping once per day.
It was correct to assume that statistically you had a better chance of obtaining it within the first 25 days then any days after that.
Unfortunately, when it came to 'coming back the next day', some people believe that magically they had a greater chance of getting the mount based on the facts of the first day. They thought that they will get it by x days. No. Sadly and depressingly, every-time you return and kill the boss, it's a fresh 4% chance and a fresh 25 days FROM THAT NEW TIME.
Statistics are constantly misunderstood by humans beings who subconsciously believe in an aspect of fate or luck. At the end of the day statistics are about perspective.
You can make a prediction in the past that stays true. But it can conflict with a fresh prediction today. But regardless, the past prediction is still correct. Statistics are something which I doubt the human mind can ever fully grasp. I am guilty of misunderstanding statistics in everyday settings myself.
What is this blasphemy?barbzilla said:
It's
Parenthesis
Exponents (/Roots (same thing really))
Multiplication (/Division)
Addition (/Subtraction)
Maybe it's an American (edit: Wikipedia says similar acronyms are used for example in Canada and UK. What's wrong with everybody?) thing to teach them all weird. Here in Finland they never found it necessary to say multiplication before division when they're basically the same damn calculation and their order makes no difference.
i'm no good with numbers so i don't use math at all, barely passed it in university and forgot everything next year when started learning profession orientated stuff. Actually i struggle with simple add and subtract, so if i need something calculated i just use calculator.
I was never even taught that. And right up until GCSE (16) My entire class were taught that if you saw a multiply by 0, then the answer was zero.
I was quite surprised when five years later everyone started going on about BODMAS and why multiplication by zero suddenly isn't automatically zero. Either some massive shift in mathematics occured or my school had some pretty lax standards. (and I don't care. Seriously, don't explain it to me, I will neither read it nor absorb the information.)
Because part 2 is: Unless you work in a math intensive field, you will never need anything more than addition, subtraction, and perhaps basic multiplication. The burden of mathematics has been taken off us, with these amazing tools called calculators. We have them on phones, we have them on computers, we have them in the original form. There is no need to worry about math, because you don't need it.
What exactly will you need the quadratic equation for? When your maths teacher told you you could use Pythagoras to help keep your garden tidy did it not occur to you that you could just use common sense and judge it by sight without having to take exact measurements of the hedges?
No one would nowadays ask you to make fire with flint and stone, so why do we still accuse people who use calculators of somehow 'cheating' at maths? Humans use tools, we always have and we always will, and so not to use them is in fact evolutionarily backwards.
I was quite surprised when five years later everyone started going on about BODMAS and why multiplication by zero suddenly isn't automatically zero. Either some massive shift in mathematics occured or my school had some pretty lax standards. (and I don't care. Seriously, don't explain it to me, I will neither read it nor absorb the information.)
Because part 2 is: Unless you work in a math intensive field, you will never need anything more than addition, subtraction, and perhaps basic multiplication. The burden of mathematics has been taken off us, with these amazing tools called calculators. We have them on phones, we have them on computers, we have them in the original form. There is no need to worry about math, because you don't need it.
What exactly will you need the quadratic equation for? When your maths teacher told you you could use Pythagoras to help keep your garden tidy did it not occur to you that you could just use common sense and judge it by sight without having to take exact measurements of the hedges?
No one would nowadays ask you to make fire with flint and stone, so why do we still accuse people who use calculators of somehow 'cheating' at maths? Humans use tools, we always have and we always will, and so not to use them is in fact evolutionarily backwards.
Math isn't very important to me at all. Anything beyond elementary school math just seems kind of superfluous unless you're going into a field that requires more. Which, uh, I won't be.
I'm not very good at math. Ever since sixth grade, I've only just barely scraped by in my math classes. Very consistent Ds. I failed my geometry class and was given a P in intermediate algebra. (For those who don't know, a "P" is essentially an F that lets you pass. Generally only given if a teacher is merciful.) I also failed Algebra II, which prevented me from graduating on time.
[sub]She could've just given me a P...[/sub]
Part of me is convinced I was just cursed with horrible teachers. When I retook geometry and first semester algebra II (I took consumer math in place of second semester) in an online credit recovery course, I got a final grade of B both times. In the brick-and-mortar classes, I actually wound up dreading being there, to the point of suffering from math anxiety [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_anxiety] for a month or two. I wasn't capable of grasping the concepts as quick as I was required (literally a new concept every day or two).
So. I don't really like math.
I'm not very good at math. Ever since sixth grade, I've only just barely scraped by in my math classes. Very consistent Ds. I failed my geometry class and was given a P in intermediate algebra. (For those who don't know, a "P" is essentially an F that lets you pass. Generally only given if a teacher is merciful.) I also failed Algebra II, which prevented me from graduating on time.
[sub]She could've just given me a P...[/sub]
Part of me is convinced I was just cursed with horrible teachers. When I retook geometry and first semester algebra II (I took consumer math in place of second semester) in an online credit recovery course, I got a final grade of B both times. In the brick-and-mortar classes, I actually wound up dreading being there, to the point of suffering from math anxiety [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_anxiety] for a month or two. I wasn't capable of grasping the concepts as quick as I was required (literally a new concept every day or two).
So. I don't really like math.
Oh, there is a logical* system. But it's not the only such system that we could apply to evaluating strings of symbols. PEDMAS is perfectly valid, but no more so than strict left-to-right or right-to-left evaluation. It's certainly not objectively better in anyway.Darkmantle said:
When I say arbitrary, what I mean is that our choice of that system over all of the others that are perfectly equivalent is arbitrary, but when we have chosen a set of rules they must be applied consistently in order to be useful.
*That's a pretty loaded word in this context.
So you don't need to know maths when you have a calculator? News to me. You still need maths to know what to tell the calculator to do. Let's imagine a situation that could happen to people other than just those who need advanced math in their profession: Someone tells you he'll pay you 15:1 your bet if you throw heads four times in a row. Should you play?MelasZepheos said:
im gonna honest i am absolutely awful about math, some things i just cant wrap my head around.
like the whole pemdas thing, i did know about the order of operations i just dont get it, why arent you doing them from left to right anyway?
sorry if i sound dumb but i just dont get it.
like the whole pemdas thing, i did know about the order of operations i just dont get it, why arent you doing them from left to right anyway?
sorry if i sound dumb but i just dont get it.
Nitpicking: Ideally and Shouldn't Want does basically say, you can still do what ever you want. I did basically say it's not useful past that point and with the example given.Mortai Gravesend said:
I'm grateful that you wanted to nitpick me.
Perhaps I give too much credit to the intelligence of other people.
My point being that (assuming you know the definition of the + - x / operators) you dont need to know PEMDAS/BODMAS if you use brackets. Which makes it easier for a much larger number of people to know whats going on no matter what their background in mathematics. I didnt learn order of operations - I still havent to this day - and I cant think im the only one who didnt.Mortai Gravesend said:
When reading through a textbook or solving with pen and paper NOBODY (at least not in my textbooks, my coursemates or my proffesors) is going to write an expression in that manner. Thats not an accident. The way the above problems are written is confusing - thats their purpose. Their only place would be to test your knowledge of PEMDAS/BODMAS in an exam for a course you actually learnt it in. After that they become largley irrelevant.
Unless youre trying to put one over someone an equation written in that manner serves precisely no purpose.
Also in doing mathematical solutions to a problem it is very important to know exactly where everything came from. If (as I am atm) youre doing a problem that requires two full sides of A4 to solve having 2x1 instead of 2 helps you track back through the problem easier which is very helpful if you make a mistake.
Even when working through something fairly basic such as 3x3 matrix multiplication its often helpful to write in the 1s and 0s as you can easily track back through the problem and see what you did and where all your numbers came from. Its just good practise tbh.
