MHB How should I interpret a formula without brackets?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Samwise-zambeezi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra
Samwise-zambeezi
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I have a formula which i might have expected to have brackets, but it hasn't, so i need to correctly interpret it.

Could anyone please offer any pointers as to how it should read?

The formula is '1.2 . h - 0.2 . x'

Can i assume that it should be '(1.2 . h) - (0.2 . x)'?

Thanks

Zamb
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You don't really need to "assume" that. Remember "PEMDAS" ("Please Excuse my dear aunt Sally")- Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtration. Multiplication and division have precedence over addition and subtraction.
 
Samwise-zambeezi said:
Hi all,

I have a formula which i might have expected to have brackets, but it hasn't, so i need to correctly interpret it.

Could anyone please offer any pointers as to how it should read?

The formula is '1.2 . h - 0.2 . x'

Can i assume that it should be '(1.2 . h) - (0.2 . x)'?

Thanks

Zamb
To be a bit more direct,.. Yes, that would be correct. However I still don't like it because it really reads 1*2*h - 0*2*x. Never use "." for multiplication unless you have defined it unambiguously!

-Dan
 
Hi both,

thanks a lot for your feedback, much appreciated,

Zambeezi
 

Thread 'What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight'

Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
View full post »

Thread 'Fermat's Last Theorem'

Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
View full post »
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'

Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'

I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
View full post »

Similar threads

MHB Rearranging Formulas: Finding W in Terms of M and L
Replies
5
Views
1K
A How should I write an account of prime numbers?
Replies
5
Views
2K
MHB How to Derive Answers Using N Formula
Replies
4
Views
1K
I Alternating Harmonic Numbers are cool, spread the word!
Replies
4
Views
2K
MHB Understanding Cubic Equation Formula for Polynomials of Degree Three
Replies
9
Views
3K
I Discussion on the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics
Replies
11
Views
765
MHB Pressure and Force - Fluid Dynamics
Replies
2
Views
2K
About semidirect product of Lie algebra
Replies
19
Views
3K
MHB Rearranging Formula, making x the subject from y=5(x+3)
Replies
12
Views
3K
I How to visualize the maths behind a formula?
Replies
7
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top