Add new comment

Permalink

The Problem with PEMDAS: Why Calculators Disagree
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x-BcYCiKCk

Just to add to the video, From 9:00 you can read what CASIO wrote to her, and here is most of it transcribed:

CASIO describe their PEJMDAS as:

" take following process about calculations because they said that it is natural to calculate inside parenthesis and multiplication with abbreviated multiplicative mark right before parenthesis as top priority, after that to calculate the divisions at the both side:

6÷2(1+2)
=6÷6
=1

"Since 2005 we have launched our calculator fx-ES series to the market ... we adopted an idea supported mainly in North America. They say it is natural to calculate a formula with abbreviated multiplicative sign just the same as a formula without multiplicative one. Based on our hearing result at that moment and under the calculation process below:

6÷2(1+2)
=6÷2x3=3x3
=9

"After launching out calculator FX-ES PLUS series, such as fx-95SG PLUS ... since 2008, our calculator returned to the same specification on the calculation order in a formula as the unit like FX-570MS, base on latest hearing result; we adopted the way of thinking to calculate inside parenthesis and multiplication with abbreviated multiplication sign right before parenthesis as top priority, after that to calculate the divisions at the both side. And this way of thinking is to be kept using as a specification at Casio future calculator products, such as fx scientific series."

Unformatted text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.