- #1

- 87

- 2

- Thread starter ecoo
- Start date

- #1

- 87

- 2

- #2

Matterwave

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 3,965

- 326

Really, this is just convention, like reading an equation from left to right, or PEMDAS.

- #3

- 87

- 2

Sure, but what I was wondering is that the dash makes the number a negative. Why would you have to put it in parenthesis? The dash is simply showing the number is negative. Why would you put 3^2 in parenthesis then multiply by negative 1? Just as if 3 was positive it would be +3. Isn't the dash just saying the number is negative?

Really, this is just convention, like reading an equation from left to right, or PEMDAS.

- #4

Mentallic

Homework Helper

- 3,798

- 94

[tex](-3)^2=(-1\times 3)^2=(-1)^2\times (3)^2 = (-1)\times(-1)\times 9= 1\times 9[/tex]

- #5

- 87

- 2

So a negative number is always -1 multiplied by that number? -3 = -1 * 3, but can't it as well just be 1 * -3? Negative 3 is just another number like positive 3, I thought.^{2}=9 is because

[tex](-3)^2=(-1\times 3)^2=(-1)^2\times (3)^2 = (-1)\times(-1)\times 9= 1\times 9[/tex]

- #6

Matterwave

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 3,965

- 326

It's just the way people decided to do things. There's nothing really wrong if you define -3^2 to equal (-3)^2, but we defined it the other way as -(3^2).Sure, but what I was wondering is that the dash makes the number a negative. Why would you have to put it in parenthesis? The dash is simply showing the number is negative. Why would you put 3^2 in parenthesis then multiply by negative 1? Just as if 3 was positive it would be +3. Isn't the dash just saying the number is negative?

People could be completely pedantic and just demand the usage of parenthesis everywhere. So that 1+2*3 must be written 1+(2*3). But this is a hassle, so we use PEMDAS. This eliminates the need for a lot of parentheses. Exponentiation comes before all other operations (other than parenthesis) so you should read -3^2 as -(3^2).

- #7

- 87

- 2

If it's convention wouldn't it be better to just write (-1)3^2 instead of saying just -3^2 = -9 which is a bit confusing? (Or maybe it's just me :D)

Really, this is just convention, like reading an equation from left to right, or PEMDAS.

- #8

- 87

- 2

OHHHH I see now! :D thanks man. Now it is clear!It's just the way people decided to do things. There's nothing really wrong if you define -3^2 to equal (-3)^2, but we defined it the other way as -(3^2).

People could be completely pedantic and just demand the usage of parenthesis everywhere. So that 1+2*3 must be written 1+(2*3). But this is a hassle, so we use PEMDAS. This eliminates the need for a lot of parentheses. Exponentiation comes before all other operations (other than parenthesis) so you should read -3^2 as -(3^2).

- #9

Mentallic

Homework Helper

- 3,798

- 94

-3 IS just another number, but each number can be expressed in varying ways, and it turns out that -3 = -1*3 helps us, while -3 and 1*-3 give us no extra insight into why (-3)So a negative number is always -1 multiplied by that number? -3 = -1 * 3, but can't it as well just be 1 * -3? Negative 3 is just another number like positive 3, I thought.

- #10

- 87

- 2

Yes yes I see that :D but just as you can say 3 = -1 * -3. I forgot about pemdas, but now I see. I just think it makes more sense (to me) to say that -3^2 = 9 instead of -9 (but of course mathematicians follow pemdas, so yea :D)-3 IS just another number, but each number can be expressed in varying ways, and it turns out that -3 = -1*3 helps us, while -3 and 1*-3 give us no extra insight into why (-3)^{2}=9 and not -9. If you know the rule [itex](ab)^n=a^n\times b^n[/itex] then you can use the fact that [itex]-3=-1\times 3[/itex] to prove to yourself that it is indeed the case.

- #11

symbolipoint

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 6,082

- 1,143

You are going backward from what you began to understand.Yes yes I see that :D but just as you can say 3 = -1 * -3. I forgot about pemdas, but now I see. I just think it makes more sense (to me) to say that -3^2 = 9 instead of -9 (but of course mathematicians follow pemdas, so yea :D)

3^2 is 9.

+3^2 is 9. The plus sign was not needed.

-3^2 is the OPPOSITE of 3^2; therefore -3^2 is the opposite of 9.

- #12

Matterwave

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 3,965

- 326

Your suggestion would get really confusing in expressions like 1-3^2. We should be consistent in using PEMDAS, otherwise, one would have to always write 1-(3^2).Yes yes I see that :D but just as you can say 3 = -1 * -3. I forgot about pemdas, but now I see. I just think it makes more sense (to me) to say that -3^2 = 9 instead of -9 (but of course mathematicians follow pemdas, so yea :D)

- #13

HallsofIvy

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 41,833

- 956

That is a result of the "precedence" conventions for arithmetic: PEMDAS (or "Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally") Any calculations in Parentheses are done first, then exponents, then multiplication and division, then addition and subtraction. Here the exponentiation is done first, 3^2= 9, then the "multiplying" by -1. (It really doesn't matter whether you think of this as "negation" or "subtraction" from 0.)

- #14

- 87

- 2

But (-3)^2 =9. I'm wondering why you have to write it in parenthesis to get (-3) * (-3) = 9You are going backward from what you began to understand.

3^2 is 9.

+3^2 is 9. The plus sign was not needed.

-3^2 is the OPPOSITE of 3^2; therefore -3^2 is the opposite of 9.

- #15

- 87

- 2

But isn't negatuve 3 just another number like positive ? So they negative sign is just telling that 3 is negatuve. Why would you have to put that in parenthesis?That is a result of the "precedence" conventions for arithmetic: PEMDAS (or "Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally") Any calculations in Parentheses are done first, then exponents, then multiplication and division, then addition and subtraction. Here the exponentiation is done first, 3^2= 9, then the "multiplying" by -1. (It really doesn't matter whether you think of this as "negation" or "subtraction" from 0.)

-3^2 to me should still me -3 * -3

- #16

- 3,393

- 181

If we used your convention, such that negation has higher priority than exponentiation, then our notation for polynomials starts to fall apart. For example, under your convention,But isn't negatuve 3 just another number like positive ? So they negative sign is just telling that 3 is negatuve. Why would you have to put that in parenthesis?

-3^2 to me should still me -3 * -3

$$x^2 - y^2 = x^2 + (-y)^2 = x^2 + y^2$$

or maybe, if we don't generously insert the implied ##+##, we interpret it as follows:

$$x^2 - y^2 = (x^2)(-y)^2 = x^2 y^2$$

If we wanted to subtract the square of ##y## from the square of ##x## we would have to write

$$x^2 - (y^2)$$

Also, we would have the curious situation that

$$-x^2 = (-x)^2 = x^2$$

but

$$-1x^2 = (-1)(x^2) = -(x^2)$$

so now we can no longer even multiply by ##1## without potentially changing the value.

- #17

Mentallic

Homework Helper

- 3,798

- 94

Like Matterwave brought up in post #12, expressions such as 1-3But isn't negatuve 3 just another number like positive ? So they negative sign is just telling that 3 is negatuve. Why would you have to put that in parenthesis?

-3^2 to me should still me -3 * -3

- #18

- 87

- 2

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/61523.html

So i was right in thinking the dash is actually treated as a subtraction symbol?

- #19

adjacent

Gold Member

- 1,549

- 63

Of course. If you have a number like :##-5## it's actually ##0-5##

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/61523.html

So i was right in thinking the dash is actually treated as a subtraction symbol?

- #20

- 575

- 76

I think maybe where you're getting confused is that you think that the grouping of sybmbols "##-3^2##" has inherent meaning. It does not. It's just a bunch of squiggles on the page until we've given it meaning.But isn't negatuve 3 just another number like positive ? So they negative sign is just telling that 3 is negatuve. Why would you have to put that in parenthesis?

-3^2 to me should still me -3 * -3

If you believe in alternate universes, then in one of them "##-3^2##" is interpreted as meaning ##(-3)\times(-3)=9##, and this is perfectly reasonable. In this universe, however, we have chosen to interpret "##-3^2##" as meaning ##-(3\times3)=-9##.

Now others here have tried to persuade you by giving you reasons why the notation means what it means. I'm going to tell you that there are no reasons. It's (basically) completely arbitrary. There are two completely reasonable interpretations, and as a group we decided a long time ago to use the second. It's fine if you disagree with that decision; I have a

Now to those here that argue that the notation would get confusing if we chose the alternate interpretation or a different order of operations, understand two things; (1) it only seems confusing to you because you are so used to the commonly accepted conventions and (2) the conventional notation is as confusing to your students (if not more so) than unconventional notation is to you. In a different universe, the distributive law looks like ##c\times a+b=(c\times a)+(c\times b)##, and in another it looks like ##c+(a\times b)=(c+a)\times(c+b)##. This isn't because the math is different in that universe; it's that the symbols used to express the mathematics are interpret differently.

- #21

Matterwave

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 3,965

- 326

Although it is true that notational convention is notational convention and is completely arbitrary, if you change only ONE piece of notational convention, without changing the others, you will most likely get unresolvable ambiguities. If the OP wants to change -3^2 to mean (-3)^2, then he has to change basically ALL of our conventions around to make them consistently interpretable. This was what I was trying to get at earlier when I said statements such as 1-3^2 would be ambiguous if we chose to keep PEMDAS. Of course, we can very well discard PEMDAS, and choose 1-3^2=1+(-3)^2 with implicit addition symbols...but...then there's other rules we have to define!I think maybe where you're getting confused is that you think that the grouping of sybmbols "##-3^2##" has inherent meaning. It does not. It's just a bunch of squiggles on the page until we've given it meaning.

If you believe in alternate universes, then in one of them "##-3^2##" is interpreted as meaning ##(-3)\times(-3)=9##, and this is perfectly reasonable. In this universe, however, we have chosen to interpret "##-3^2##" as meaning ##-(3\times3)=-9##.

Now others here have tried to persuade you by giving you reasons why the notation means what it means. I'm going to tell you that there are no reasons. It's (basically) completely arbitrary. There are two completely reasonable interpretations, and as a group we decided a long time ago to use the second. It's fine if you disagree with that decision; I have atonof issues with mathematical notation that I think is "wrong". But disagreeing with the chosen notation does not change the fact that, to everyone that "matters", "##-3^2##" means ##-(3\times 3)##.

Now to those here that argue that the notation would get confusing if we chose the alternate interpretation or a different order of operations, understand two things; (1) it only seems confusing to you because you are so used to the commonly accepted conventions and (2) the conventional notation is as confusing to your students (if not more so) than unconventional notation is to you. In a different universe, the distributive law looks like ##c\times a+b=(c\times a)+(c\times b)##, and in another it looks like ##c+(a\times b)=(c+a)\times(c+b)##. This isn't because the math is different in that universe; it's that the symbols used to express the mathematics are interpret differently.

- #22

- 575

- 76

If you decide that subtraction/negation takes precedence over exponentiation, as is the case with the interpretation ##-3^2=(-3)^2##, then ##1-3^2=(1-3)^2##.Although it is true that notational convention is notational convention and is completely arbitrary, if you change only ONE piece of notational convention, without changing the others, you will most likely get unresolvable ambiguities. If the OP wants to change -3^2 to mean (-3)^2, then he has to change basically ALL of our conventions around to make them consistently interpretable. This was what I was trying to get at earlier when I said statements such as 1-3^2 would be ambiguous if we chose to keep PEMDAS. Of course, we can very well discard PEMDAS, and choose 1-3^2=1+(-3)^2 with implicit addition symbols...but...then there's other rules we have to define!

- #23

Matterwave

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 3,965

- 326

But this is assuming that the OP takes subtraction from 0 and the symbol -x to be equivalent procedures. Is that THE ONLY possible way? It seems to me that the OP, at least initially, thought that there was a fundamental difference between seeing 0-3 and -3. If this is so, then in his new notation, there would seem to be a possibility of a difference in ordering between 1-3^2 and 1+-3^2.If you decide that subtraction/negation takes precedence over exponentiation, as is the case with the interpretation ##-3^2=(-3)^2##, then ##1-3^2=(1-3)^2##.

Is this not an ambiguity?

- #24

jbriggs444

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

2019 Award

- 9,316

- 4,017

[I can't think of a reasonable meaning for unary negation that would be different from the result obtained by subtraction from zero, but that may be simply lack of imagination on my part]

One could even decide that the minus sign should be interpreted as part of a numeric literal such as "-3". If you are doing a first pass over an equation with a lexical analyzer looking for syntax elements, this approach might seem attractive at first glance. However it becomes problematic when using juxtaposition to indicate multiplication.

Would 1-3 then be interpreted as the multiplication of 1 and -3 or as the subtraction of 3 from 1?

- #25

- 87

- 2

So it would seem that if the dash in front of 3 were superscript, then the answer would be positive 9.

- Last Post

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 7K

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 8K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 13K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 744

- Last Post

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 707

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 3K