Like how a(b+c) is the same no matter what you call it
It’s always (ab+ac), yes, except fpr those who follow a literally made up rule and claim, wrongly, that it’s ax(b+c) 🙄
But you don’t think a=b means b=a, so “the same” rolls right through both ears.
says person who doesnt’ know the difference between equals and identically equals, and made up the a=b, b=a example to ignore the actual example I gave that axb=ab, but ab does not equal axb, it equals (axb) .🙄 ab==(axb)
Says someone who wasn’t even capable of checking if that was the right model! 😂😂😂 Will take that as an admission of being wrong, again
says liar who is contradicted by the manual, and tried to pass off an emulator for a different model to try and hide that
says liar. The usual then, go get a screenshot of me saying that. I’ll wait 😂
They do the same thing.
Like how a(b+c) is the same no matter what you call it.
But you don’t think a=b means b=a, so “the same” rolls right through both ears.
It’s always (ab+ac), yes, except fpr those who follow a literally made up rule and claim, wrongly, that it’s ax(b+c) 🙄
says person who doesnt’ know the difference between equals and identically equals, and made up the a=b, b=a example to ignore the actual example I gave that axb=ab, but ab does not equal axb, it equals (axb) .🙄 ab==(axb)
Textbooks say one means the other and you performatively pretend nuh-uh. It’s saying they are identical.
says person unable to cite any such textbook 🙄
ab==(axb), yes, that’s what == means, identically equal
“The multiplication sign is often not included between letters, e.g. 3ab means 3 * a * b.” Page 31 of the PDF. Next page: “3(x+y) means 3*(x+y).”
It’s saying they’re identical.