Where in your textbook does it say explicitly that ab is not a multiplication, or that a multiplication is different from a product in any substantive sense, eh?
You going to reply now? Or just gonna ignore it as usual?
None of the screenshots you put in that reply even use the word “multiplication”, so they are certainly not saying explicitly that ab is not a multiplication or that a multiplication is different from a product, are they. This level of reading comprehension is what got you here.
I’ve not read the rest; I’m sure you were wise enough to put your best attempt first.
None of the screenshots you put in that reply even use the word “multiplication”
So what do you call 10x3, exactly? I’ll wait 😂
so they are certainly not saying explicitly that ab is not a multiplication
They are saying explicitly that bc is a Term, and goes entirely into the denominator, not c into the numerator like in a/bxc does.
that a multiplication is different from a product
So, according to you, c going into the denominator, and c going into the numerator, are somehow not different 🤣🤣🤣 a/bxc, where c goes in the numerator, and a/bc, where c goes in the denominator, go ahead, explain it to me like I’m 5, how are they the same thing according to you 🤣🤣🤣
This level of reading comprehension is what got you here
says person who can’t tell the difference between a/bxc=axc/b, and a/bc=a/(bxc) 🤣🤣🤣
I’m sure you were wise enough to put your best attempt first
Hey, I was restricting it to the same textbook like you said. If you wanna go ahead and open it up to other textbooks , then explain how a/bxc=16 and a/bc=1 are the same thing , I’ll wait. 🤣🤣🤣 I’ve never encountered anyone who has claimed 1 and 16 are the same thing, so go ahead and explain it to me 🤣🤣🤣
Not important. It’s an example, not explicit. If I asked for an explicit reference for the meaning of the word “table”, a source that discusses carpentry but never uses the word itself is not explicit. Do you need me to explain in more detail what “explicit” means? Do you need me to explain why I’m demanding you find an explicit reference?
I, for one, am content that there is no such explicit reference for your interpretation of the meaning of the word multiplication. If you are finding it difficult to find one but are still convinced, that’s fine - just fulfill one of the other options you have to demonstrate it’s worth holding a discussion about mathematics.
Your second reference says “when multiplications are denoted by juxtaposition, as in 4c ÷ 3ab”. Very interesting. Maybe we can discuss that after you demonstrate it’s worth it.
Further down you have again quoted (but not highlighted) the section which says “other rules than those just described might have been adopted” which, again, is interesting.
None of the screenshots you put in that reply even use the word “multiplication”,
So let me help you out…
It’s an example, not explicit.
It explicitly says “Multiplication” at the bottom of the page! 😂
If I asked for an explicit reference for the meaning of the word “table”, a source that discusses carpentry but never uses the word itself is not explicit
And this page does use the word “Multiplication”. Are you seeing yet why I kept telling you to read more than 2 sentences? 😂
Do you need me to explain in more detail what “explicit” means?
Do you need me to explain in more detail what “read more than 2 sentences” means?
I, for one, am content that there is no such explicit reference for your interpretation of the meaning of the word multiplication
And yet there it is, right there on page 23. Who would thought? Oh yeah, people who have read more than 2 sentences out of the whole book 😂
Your second reference says “when multiplications are denoted by juxtaposition, as in 4c ÷ 3ab”. Very interesting.
Yeah, 1912 textbooks are “very interesting”, much more so than modern textbooks which never call it such 😂
Maybe we can discuss that after you demonstrate it’s worth it
I already pointed out the problem with your not reading more than 2 sentences out of a textbook again there
“other rules than those just described might have been adopted” which, again, is interesting
It’s not actually, if you know the history behind that comment, which I have no doubt that you don’t
You’re using different screenshots this time? Well done, you’ve progressed to ones that include the word, but unfortunately you seem to have forgotten the task. Try again!
Nope. Exact same page I already referred you to before, page 23.
Well done, you’ve progressed to ones that include the word
Just like the ones that include the word “Product”, eh? 🤣🤣🤣 Well done for reading beyond 1 sentence this time by the way. Now go back to the other ones and read beyond 1 sentence - you’ve just shown you’re capable of it
unfortunately you seem to have forgotten the task
Not me - the difference between axb is Multiplication, as per page 23, and ab is a Product, as per page 36. Still waiting on you doing your task of explaining how they give 2 different answers when, according to you, they are “the same thing” 🙄
The screenshot you started off with is a crop of the one you’re now talking about, so yes, different screenshots
Same page. you having trouble finding page 23, or you didn’t even look for it? BTW I left it out quite deliberately and asked you what you would call it, and you didn’t answer, then claimed that “they” (the textbook authors I presume) “they are certainly not saying explicitly that ab is not a multiplication or that a multiplication is different from a product, are they”, and yes, they most certainly are saying that, which you would know if you had read the textbook. 🙄 You, the person who only read the underlined parts in screenshots, even though I repeatedly said to keep reading in order to avoid this embarrassment, then followed that up with “This level of reading comprehension is what got you here”. Yep, this level of reading comprehension - you not reading the textbook, only the underlined parts of screenshots - is indeed what got you here 🙄
I’m curious - can you admit to that, even?
Can you admit that you’re basing your whole argument on only reading what I underlined in screenshots and not, you know, actually reading the textbook? 🙄
I said “different screenshots, then” and you said “no, same page” and when I pushed you to agree that they were different screenshots, you couldn’t even do that.
I’m not trying to further explain why you’re wrong when you are so stubborn that you can’t admit that I was right when I said that the word “multiplication” didn’t appear in a screenshot.
Thanks for demonstrating it even better than you had before!
None of the screenshots you put in that reply even use the word “multiplication”, so they are certainly not saying explicitly that ab is not a multiplication or that a multiplication is different from a product, are they. This level of reading comprehension is what got you here.
I’ve not read the rest; I’m sure you were wise enough to put your best attempt first.
So what do you call 10x3, exactly? I’ll wait 😂
They are saying explicitly that bc is a Term, and goes entirely into the denominator, not c into the numerator like in a/bxc does.
So, according to you, c going into the denominator, and c going into the numerator, are somehow not different 🤣🤣🤣 a/bxc, where c goes in the numerator, and a/bc, where c goes in the denominator, go ahead, explain it to me like I’m 5, how are they the same thing according to you 🤣🤣🤣
says person who can’t tell the difference between a/bxc=axc/b, and a/bc=a/(bxc) 🤣🤣🤣
Hey, I was restricting it to the same textbook like you said. If you wanna go ahead and open it up to other textbooks , then explain how a/bxc=16 and a/bc=1 are the same thing , I’ll wait. 🤣🤣🤣 I’ve never encountered anyone who has claimed 1 and 16 are the same thing, so go ahead and explain it to me 🤣🤣🤣
Not important. It’s an example, not explicit. If I asked for an explicit reference for the meaning of the word “table”, a source that discusses carpentry but never uses the word itself is not explicit. Do you need me to explain in more detail what “explicit” means? Do you need me to explain why I’m demanding you find an explicit reference?
I, for one, am content that there is no such explicit reference for your interpretation of the meaning of the word multiplication. If you are finding it difficult to find one but are still convinced, that’s fine - just fulfill one of the other options you have to demonstrate it’s worth holding a discussion about mathematics.
Your second reference says “when multiplications are denoted by juxtaposition, as in 4c ÷ 3ab”. Very interesting. Maybe we can discuss that after you demonstrate it’s worth it.
Further down you have again quoted (but not highlighted) the section which says “other rules than those just described might have been adopted” which, again, is interesting.
Says person who said…
So let me help you out…
It explicitly says “Multiplication” at the bottom of the page! 😂
And this page does use the word “Multiplication”. Are you seeing yet why I kept telling you to read more than 2 sentences? 😂
Do you need me to explain in more detail what “read more than 2 sentences” means?
And yet there it is, right there on page 23. Who would thought? Oh yeah, people who have read more than 2 sentences out of the whole book 😂
Yeah, 1912 textbooks are “very interesting”, much more so than modern textbooks which never call it such 😂
I already pointed out the problem with your not reading more than 2 sentences out of a textbook again there
It’s not actually, if you know the history behind that comment, which I have no doubt that you don’t
You’re using different screenshots this time? Well done, you’ve progressed to ones that include the word, but unfortunately you seem to have forgotten the task. Try again!
Nope. Exact same page I already referred you to before, page 23.
Just like the ones that include the word “Product”, eh? 🤣🤣🤣 Well done for reading beyond 1 sentence this time by the way. Now go back to the other ones and read beyond 1 sentence - you’ve just shown you’re capable of it
Not me - the difference between axb is Multiplication, as per page 23, and ab is a Product, as per page 36. Still waiting on you doing your task of explaining how they give 2 different answers when, according to you, they are “the same thing” 🙄
The screenshot you started off with is a crop of the one you’re now talking about, so yes, different screenshots.
I’m curious - can you admit to that, even?
Same page. you having trouble finding page 23, or you didn’t even look for it? BTW I left it out quite deliberately and asked you what you would call it, and you didn’t answer, then claimed that “they” (the textbook authors I presume) “they are certainly not saying explicitly that ab is not a multiplication or that a multiplication is different from a product, are they”, and yes, they most certainly are saying that, which you would know if you had read the textbook. 🙄 You, the person who only read the underlined parts in screenshots, even though I repeatedly said to keep reading in order to avoid this embarrassment, then followed that up with “This level of reading comprehension is what got you here”. Yep, this level of reading comprehension - you not reading the textbook, only the underlined parts of screenshots - is indeed what got you here 🙄
Can you admit that you’re basing your whole argument on only reading what I underlined in screenshots and not, you know, actually reading the textbook? 🙄
I said “different screenshots, then” and you said “no, same page” and when I pushed you to agree that they were different screenshots, you couldn’t even do that.
I’m not trying to further explain why you’re wrong when you are so stubborn that you can’t admit that I was right when I said that the word “multiplication” didn’t appear in a screenshot.
Thanks for demonstrating it even better than you had before!