You do you, friend. Whatever makes you feel better about your ignorance.

Which would explain why you don’t know The Distributive Law, which is taught in Year 7

Me: consistently using the Distributive Law throughout the thread.

You: "Which would explain why you don’t know The Distributive Law, which is taught in Year 7"

How does that work again?

No, just evidence to back up your claims, but of course you don’t have any

I showed you two, you showed yourself one - how many more do you need?

You know reading things again doesn’t change what’s written right??

True, but reading again carefully would change what you thought was written, friend.

still say, do all addition first

OK, here's a challenge for you - quote the bit that says "do all addition first".

Well, apparently you are, since there are no Maths textbooks listed in the sources

Awww, you're so cute! You think all maths knowledge only comes from school textbooks! <3

Let’s go to the screenshot… (...) Nope, see screenshot of you saying they are the same

Ah, so you don't know what "context" is. Got it. I'll try to keep things easier to understand for you going forward.

Now you’re just rehashing the same already-debunked rubbish. The whole point of the mnemonics is for those who don’t understand, just follow these steps

In which case they will often make mistakes, as shown by the "9 minus whatever plus something" equation I did. Again, I get that you're only on your "day two on the Internet" so you're not aware of it, but these kinds of equations cause people A LOT of trouble.

Don't get me wrong - I get what you're saying. That if the people who don't understand the order of operations understood the Distributive Law, then their lack of understanding of the order of operations wouldn't matter. But, I hope, you get where this line of thinking fails, right?

Did that already with the textbooks and worked examples. Maybe you need to read it slowly?

Ah, so you're saying that a site teaching maths is wrong, and your proof is the fact that you don't understand how sentences work? Cool, cool.

Nope. Again let’s go to the screenshot…

Which proves what, in your mind...?

AS doesn’t reinforce doing A before S?

A is not before S. A is equal to S in the order of operations. As proven here, here, here or here, which also conveniently mentions the two different mnemonics in PEMDAS and BODMAS (where, I'm sure your keen eye will notice, the D and M are flipped).

Here's a short quote from the second to last source:

Multiplication and division can be done together. In other words, it doesn’t matter if you do division or multiplication first, but they must be done after parentheses and exponents and before addition and subtraction. (...) Addition and subtraction also work together. You can do subtraction first, or you can do addition first. They are part of the same step, however, they can only be done after items in parentheses, exponents, and any multiplication and division.

So, there's that.

Yep, you’ve got none. You thought Wikipedia counted as a Maths textbook

No, I thought you were capable of checking the sources on the bottom of the article. My bad. But now I also understand that you wouldn't consider actual mathematical research as sources, because it needs to be a school book for you. I hope the university article links above will be good enough?

I knew it all along - you were the one saying that the brackets matter in PE(MD)(AS), which we’ve now comprehensively debunked 😂

You have an extremely weird fixation on brackets, friend. The only thing we've debunked is your understanding of mathematical fundamentals and reading skills. :(

No they weren’t! You have such a short memory, no wonder you ended up contradicting yourself! 🤣 Let’s go to the screenshot…

Oh no! You caught me on misremembering one of the couple of examples I gave you! NOOOOOO! My life is RUINED!

So now, again, why did you start talking about 1 + 3 if the examples were 2 - 2 and 2 / 2?

you can deflect again 😂

Awww... You can't answer these questions? I mean, I'm not surprised considering what you've shown so far but I was hoping you'd at least try.

Let’s go to the screenshot, again…

And where are the brackets, friend? Do your keen eyes see (2-2) or whatever, or 2+(-2)?

But, as I see you'll just never let go of this misconception of yours, here you are:

1.7 Negative numbers and the use of brackets

Rules of negative numbers

The rules for using negative numbers can be summarised as follows:

Addition and subtraction

• Adding a negative number is the same as subtracting a positive 50 + (-30) = 50 – 30 = 20
• Subtracting a negative number is the same as adding a positive 50 – (-30) = 50 + 30 = 80

You can see the exact same notation as I used, in the exact same context. When you read the rest of that Level 1 introductory lesson, you'll also learn that you can actually ONLY use brackets to denote negative numbers, like so: 2 + (2), which would equal to 2 - 2. Incredible, I know!

Nope. your point that brackets matter in PE(MD)(AS) is still wrong, as proven 😂

I mean... Come on - brackets DO matter in PEMDAS, they're the very first item on the list (Brackets == Parentheses). You're getting all confused here.

As to the notation of "PE(MD)(AS)" - you may be surprised to learn, but brackets used in the context of language don't mean the same thing as brackets used in the context of maths, which means that the "(MD)" doesn't somehow mean I was suggesting these should be considered to... always be in brackets? Like, I don't even know what you were trying to say here.

says person who proved it was wrong 😂

Again, it's OK to have a vivid imagination, but you're just making yourself look silly when you talk about it with others as if it's fact.

Nope! You claimed it was entirely different if you did that. Again, let’s go to the screenshot…

Yes, I agree, the way I worded that was poor. Setting pronumerals to 1 is the same as just removing them from the notation completely.

says the person actually trying to do that, as proven by the screenshots 😂

It's OK, you already understood the core concept of what I meant, I firmly believe that we can get you to understand the whole thing within a week! :)