• PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    It’s not solvable using traditional algebra.

    Typically you would try to get all of the variables on one side, and all of the numbers on the other.

    So in this instance, you’d start by moving them around to get things together:
    x+2 = x-2
    x+2-x = -2
    x-x = -2-2

    But then you simplify, and cancel out any variables that need to be cancelled. In this case we see “x-x” so that cancels out to 0. And we see -2-2 which simplifies into -4. So the end result is:

    0=-4

    Which is obviously a nonsense answer. In the original post, homeslice did the first step wrong, moved everything over to the left incorrectly, (inadvertently setting the whole equation equal to 0) and the whole thing was downhill from there; Since the first step of their solution was wrong, everything behind it was also wrong.

    • 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      You know how you sometimes make a mistake in one line, but after doing a few lines, you go back to actually writing the equation correctly? Happened to me all the time in uni. It’s basically because you were thinking of doing the next line or whatever, and you just forgot that a var or const was somewhere in there, or you just didn’t copy (or copy it correctly) in the next line, but the memory of that var/const remained in your brain, so after doing a few lines, the equation is now simple enough so your brain knows something should be there, but it’s missing. Sure, we almost always caught up with the mistake, go back, correct the last few lines and carry on. But, every once in a while, you don’t, and you carry on solving the equation, and you get a correct solution, but from a purely mathematical standpoint, yes, that solution is not correct.

      My math proffesor in uni had an interesting take on this. He said, you didn’t do 1 mistake and then correct it to get the right answer, but you actually made 2… which is worse… according to him. And I have to say, at that time, I didn’t agree, but let’s be honest… he is correct. So, he went a lot harder on those students that did this type of mistake than the ones that just made 1 and carried on solving the equation like nothing happened.

      • Janet
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        nah… its still just one error: that of transcribing your process.

        it’s like a cosmic ray randomly changed a digit in the memory cells that hold the stringbuffer prepared to be printed.

        and then the computation carries on with the internal representation of the whole process still with correct data.

        i understand your profs pov though

        • 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          From an engineering standpoint, I don’t agree with him. We make errors all the time, it’s basically how we learn how to do things the right way (try, fail, repeat). Not to mention rounding errors, we also make GIGANTIC ones (not all the time, but still).

          But, he’s a mathematician, not an engineer. So, as I said, from a purely mathematical standpoint, yes, he is correct.

          • Janet
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            well, yeah… xD as i said, i understand that pov. if that printout WAS the process, then yes.

            and for an alien that only receives that printout milled into a goldbar attached to a satellite: that would be a bummer ;3