718
I dunno
(piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2025
718 points (91.3% liked)
Science Memes
17472 readers
2916 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I fucking suck at math and totally just re-proved it to myself with this problem lmao.
It didn't make sense to me to multiply the 3 & the 5 with zero consideration for the "2". I have ALWAYS struggled with the steps to solve these types of equations.
So the answer I got was 21. Some of us are just bad with numbers, I s'pose.
If you don't remember pemdas, you can use the longer P.lease E.xcuse M.y D.ear A.unt S.ally.
Its order of operations, to get rid of brackets do the internal, then the 5 tells you there was 5 sets of the amount in brackets. Rather than 2+5 first.
The numbers in the equation and their totals are completely irrelevant to the order you perform the operations.
I don’t think it’s an issue of “being bad with numbers”, I think the issue is not understanding the logic or being able to understand the bottom up type of thinking or something.
This is absolutely not a problem of being bad with numbers. That's like if I had trouble reading a Chinese sentence about gardening and said I'm just bad with plants. My issue is that I'm not familiar with the notation used to explain the concept - not a problem with the concept itself that the notation merely arbitrarily symbolizes.
Being good or bad at math is not really an inherent thing, aside from some geniuses and some people with disabilities. If you want to be good at math, you can be!
That's the answer I arrived at as well, don't feel so bad. I'm more of a writer than a calculator, though.