Imnecomrade [none/use name]

Imnecomrade - pronounced “I am any comrade”

Techie, hippie, commie nerd

  • 24 Posts
  • 99 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 16th, 2024

help-circle








  • Sorry I meant to post with my hexbear account.

    I like to keep separate accounts for tidiness purposes as well as to make switching to different instances on Jerboa easier, plus I believe some communities are locked to users registered to the instance they are on. I posted on a web browser, but Jerboa gives the link to the post based on the instance the OP is on and not the community the post is on. I like to post on a web browser because I like to ensure I set the language to my posts, which is still not a feature on Jerboa.

    Tbh, Idk. I believe PSL usually educates and follows ML principles but may make mistakes from time to time. I’m not sure if they have trot-like tendencies from my experience so far, but I know there are other issues that I believe they need to improve on. However, one theme of ML is that the material conditions in different nations have an impact on which methods of organization are needed for a successful revolution, and we have yet to see an advanced capitalist society turn socialist. Even if PSL isn’t perfect or may or may not be the vanguard party of America in the future, I believe the actions they are taking are helping build class consciousness, which is absolutely necessary right now. We’re having to build from scratch after COINTELPRO, which means we are still in the very early stages of organizing despite growing exponentially. I don’t think PSL is necessarily trot as we have to build class consciousness and develop a centralized party under the belly of the beast, which means we have to learn and adapt to the conditions of America and use the elections as a tool.





  • 2x still means 2 * x.

    https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=6%2F2x

    x is still multiplied last. There’s not a rule for implied multiplication shorthand preceding operations to the left. You still need to wrap 2x in parentheses if you want the operation to occur first.

    https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=6%2F(2x)

    This isn’t like a polynomial like ax^2 + bx + c as division is done between 6 and 2 before multiplication with x. Typically you wouldn’t see such an equation (which is intended to trick you) as normally addition or subtraction would occur like in a polynomial or another variable equation (such as a linear graph), which would be done after the exponents, multiplication, and division with the variables are calculated. In the instance you wrote, it should be written as (6/2)x, or 3x, to avoid obscuring the equation. Though you intended for 6/(2x), or 3/x.

    And no worries, comrade, I’m just meaning to help since I am good at math and like helping people (I don’t mean this in an egotistical way). I’m not taking offense, and I am not meaning to offend anyone.


  • 2(1 + 2) does imply multiplication: 2 * (1 + 2). The reason it counts as one term, as I noted below, is because it is inside a two-dimensional fraction which has implicit parathenses in the numerator, denominator, and the fraction itself. The first equation is actually ((6) / (2(1 + 2))). When a fraction is written in two dimensions instead of a single string, the division between the numerator and the denominator is supposed to be done last.

    The first equation is not 6 / 2(1 + 2). If it was, this means you get (6 / 2) * (1 + 2) as in the second equation, which means (1 + 2) is moved up to the numerator ((6(1+2)) / 2 = (6 / 2) * (1 + 2)), which means the two problems are not equal to each other. I believe this is the point of the “joke”.



  • Assuming the first way is written correctly, the equation is actually 6 / (2 * (1 + 2)). The (1 + 2) is still inside the denominator. So it is solved as follows:

    6 / (2 * (1 + 2))

    6 / (2 * 3)

    6 / 6

    1

    The second equation incorrectly takes out the (1 + 2) and places it as the numerator on the side. In order to take that piece out correctly, it would have to be: (6 / 2) * (1 / (1 + 2))

    And to solve it, it would look like as follows:

    (6 / 2) * (1 / (1 + 2))

    3 * (1 / (1 + 2))

    3 * (1 / 3)

    3 / 3

    1

    Also, 3 * 3 = 9 in regards to second incorrect equation (incorrect meaning the second incorrectly refactored equation from the pic that you answered correctly up until the last operation).

    I think The_sleepy_woke_dialectic forgot to put parentheses around the denominator, but I believe it was meant to be interpreted as the entire denominator as shown in the pic.