Thursday, 27 June 2019

There was a maths problem

someone put on her timeline yesterday. She asked for answers. Here's the problem.
 50 + 50 - 25 x 0 + 2 + 2 =?
Now I thought I was reasonably good at counting on all four paws and I came up with answer I thought was right. It was the same answer that a good many other people came up with as well. 
Apparently we are all wrong. "You don't do maths like that anymore."
That bothers me. 
I was never wildly fond of "arithmetic" in my primary school days. I could do it but it wasn't particularly interesting. I was always losing marks - not for getting the answers incorrect but for "untidy" work. There is not much fun in that.
In high school the subject was divided into things like geometry, algebra and trigonometry. (I have forgotten how to use "log tables".)
I went on to university and had to do statistics. I hated statistics but I knew I had to pass the subject. (Yes, I did.)  Even now I have to know about statistics. I read them with a jaundiced eye. Yes, it is all too easy to manipulate them.
But I thought basic maths had not changed. I thought that in the ordinary, everyday world "two and two" still made four. Perhaps it does. I am not sure.
Maths is important, very important. We need mathematicians. 
I remember my friend J..., now sadly deceased. He had a doctorate in maths. His thesis was a mere eleven pages in length. After he had explained I think I understood what he had done but I didn't understand the thesis itself. It was full of symbols I had, to the best of my knowledge, never seen before. Despite that J... and I were good friends.
I have seen my friend R...'s son giving a lecture - and the board he was working on was filled with the same sort of thing. I have waited and waited and waited while two more mathematical friends argued over how something should be worked. (I put my paws over my ears and read some of a half written thesis while I waited.)
I don't really need to know the complex sort of mathematics but I do need to know the basic sort - not just arithmetic but the occasional bit of geometry and algebra and - of course - those damned statistics. 
What I also know is that I won't be helping the young ones do their homework. 
And what is the answer to the above problem...? I'll let you work it out - answer later.

5 comments:

Allison said...

104, isn't it?

Miriam Drori said...

I also think it's 104. But who knows what they've done with Maths since I studied it!

Gene said...

Is it not 79?

Gene said...

It is 4.

catdownunder said...

It is 104.
I thought it was 4 too - until the mathematicians (and remember I am merely a cat) pointed out that there are no brackets so the "x 0" only applies to 25 x0 and not what precedes it.
Sigh...but then I was taught maths by someone was only two chapters ahead of me in the text book. (Yes, seriously.)