Hello,
First of all I must to admit that apparently and recently disputed topic is the subject to Mandela's effect claim and it relates to correct interpretation of THE PEMDAS rule definition.
Now, the dispute divides people in to 2 groups, where the group 1 follows the recent interpretation of THE PEMDAS rule, where accordingly solution of equation: 3 x 3 - 3 : 3 + 3 = 11
And the group 2 (including myself) that interpretate THE PEMDAS rule a little bit differently than the group 1, where accordingly solution of equation: 3 x 3 - 3 : 3 + 3 = 5
Now here is why we think our solution is correct:
THE PEMDAS rule we learnt back in time, relates to the correct operation order for equation solution where THE PEMDAS correct order is always the same, despite the order of operations that are included in our equations and determines the only correct order for each operation when calculating equations and it breaks to:
P - PARENTHESES -1st
E - EXPONENTS -2nd
M - MULTIPLCATION -3rd
D - DIVISION -4th
A - ADDITION -5th
S - SUBSTRACTION -6th
Where each operation is performed exactly in the order presented above.
Which leaves no room for different interpretations or wrong order of any operation in our equation,
ruling and simplifying calculation's method for everyone worldwide.
For everyone better understanding of correct order in the method we use when solving equation is rule N⁰1 to follow by everybody and is correct and the only order for each operation we must do while solving equation.
The only exception from rule N⁰1 is usage of PARENTHESES or SQUARE BRACKETS to determine the different order we must follow therefore. This can be seen for instance in this simple equation below:
12 : 2 x 3 where accordingly to the method described above our 1st operation is multiplication followed by division and it breaks to 12 : 2 x 3 = 12 : 6 = 2
Now, if we wish to perform calculation differently to our main RULE N⁰1, then this equation would have to contain the brackets and it would look like this: (12 : 2) x 3 therefore it breaks to (12 : 2) x 3 = (6) x 3 = 18
Both of these methods were clear and very simple to understand and to use and follow bearing in mind the rule itself, however not any more as, now the equation without the brackets is solved in the way that we would perform such operation as if the brackets were in the place and for different order of operation in this case, the brackets would have to be placed in different part equation and it would have to look like this: 12 : (2 x 3)
Conclusion:
I hope my cover for this thread presented above clearly pointed out the difference between the meaning, explanation and usage of THE PEMDAS rule to guide everyone about correct way in operation order while solving equations that I have had learnt back in time comparing to its nowadays definition and present way for use of this method, that many people including myself consider as not only wrong but also flipping over our understanding for basics in mathematics creating now this rule that, not only sound off to people like myself but also simplifies absolutely nothing, too.
Now if we wish to take both methods in to the further consideration, it would leave us with no doubts which simplifying method stands out in front of the other one, don't you think?!
Expectation:
Finally, I hope at least that the thread I described to you won't be dismissed as soon as it sees the daylight but it will deserve further consideration.
I cannot wait to hearing from you and I wish to take this opportunity and thank you in advance for your reply.
With all the respect, kind regards.
your sincerely Luke
P.S
In case you don't know what Mandela's effect stands for, your most simple explanation of that term is existence of collective memory within certain group of people that would be considered as opposite memory, experience and knowledge comparing to everyone else.
For instance there are people like me that remember spreading information about the death of Nelson Mandela in the prison in RSA back in end of 80's while in reality he dies as a free man sometime in 2013.
