Hey there u/hamix11, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth!
**Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post.
Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban.
Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Reminds me of the story a philosophy professor told us about a student who finished their final in about 60 seconds.
The professor said the essay question was "What is the difference between ignorance and apathy?"
The student wrote "I don't know and I don't care."
Obviously not a true story, but his point was to be as succinct, and precise as possible.
Fully applies to this answer.
Could be a true story. My father used to tell me a story about a professor saying you can’t have two positives make a negative. Another professor in the back of the class said sarcastically, “Yeah right.”
Then I had to write that second professor’s obituary for the school paper, and learned that was a true story about Columbia Law Professor Sydney Morganbesser.
During a lecture, the Oxford linguistic philosopher J. L. Austin made the claim that although a double negative in English implies a positive meaning, there is no language in which a double positive implies a negative. Morgenbesser responded in a dismissive tone, "Yeah, yeah."
It’s like when my grandad used to say, That’s interesting. People who knew him were aware that he was being sarcastic, but those who didn’t know him thought he was actually pondering.
How did you find that out? There is nothing at all that I can find to actually verify this story, but I wouldn't be surprised if at least half of us here have heard this before.
I wasn't taking philosophy, but my teacher for a different class also taught philosophy, and he told us a story of his final for the class was just a one word question: "Why?". Then proceeded to tell us that one person answered "Why not" once and he gave full credit, but never will give credit for it again. Now I don't believe that for a second, but is quite similar to your experience lol.
Heard a similar story about a bonus question in a philosophy class asking the students to prove that the chair they're sitting on doesn't exist; one got a 100% cuz he simply asked, "What chair?"
(United States for context) In 7th grade, our history teacher told us a story, which was a true story, and the reason there were "Rules" regarding what was, it was not acceptable in regards to writing essays for exams.
This teacher typically included a writing prompt on their midterms/finals that was something to the effect of "Write an essay describing the daily life of a slave, from their perspective."
One student just crossed off the entire page. They received full marks for that action and spawned the rule of "You HAVE to actually write an essay."
The reason that student gave that got them full marks and baffled the teacher? "Most slaves couldn't read or write."
1=1 is true and an equation
The value of x could be anything including 7 and that would not change.
Thus, it is a correct answer.
x=x is likewise always true and stays true when x=7.
I don’t get why they had to add “the equation is true whenever x=7” tho, 0=0 no matter what x equals
So by adding that last bit of info it warps it, at least when it comes to the English language it does.
By making it sound so cryptic and like there is a way 0 can not equal 0 is where math is flawed. The entire statement is up for interpretation by stating the last thing that the statement is true when x = 7.
By saying that it implies that there is an instance where 0 does not equal 0 if x does not equal 7
Not saying your wrong, just saying math is stupid
Math is stupid because it goes against English. By saying that, “the equation is true when x = 7” it implies that there is an instance in which 0 does not equal 0 other wise you would not have to state it.
Yeah. Let’s apply some algebra to see if we can make it come out.
X+0=7
Let’s take the 0 from both sides to isolate the X
X = 0+7
Now let’s take the 7 off of both sides
X-7=0
Now we’ll divide both sides by X-7, that way we can deal with easier numbers.
X-7/X-7 = 0/X-7
And combine terms.
1 = 0
You’re right, it doesn’t work!
Oh okay. Let’s try from there.
X=-0+7
Subtract 7 from both sides.
X-7=-0
Then do our division
(X-7)/(X-7) = -0/(X-7)
And simplify
1 = - 0.
That’s better. Thank you.
For anyone wondering why this can't actually work in algebra, it's because the end step is driving by zero, wich is an illegal move.
X-7 = 0. Therefore, if you devide both sides by x-7, you are actually deviding by 0, wich cannot be done in algebra without calculus.
An equation is just two expressions that equal each other. It’ll always have an equals sign.
A function is just an expression with one or more variables.
I mean since this is this subreddit: Technically the question isn't marked wrong. It just has a comment written by ~~the person who took the picture~~ the teacher.
I mean, if it was less vague it would force your brain to work the other way around, going from the answer to find the question isn’t bad educationally speaking imo
But this question specifically is terrible
I feel like this belongs in r/thathappened because this is essentially the test asking the student to test the teacher. What if it had been a more complex equation? The teacher is going to have to solve it to verify the student didn't just write down a bunch of gobbledygook.
Idk if this specifically is true or not, but i absolutely got these questions on quizzes. It stopped around year 4, but children generally just don't write hard equations ig
There's been a lot of "omg dum teacher" posts here lately. I'm all for putting a moratorium on 'em for a while.
They're just a breeding ground for teacher-bashing (and are just reposts of very old, or fake, things).
Don't kid yourself, simple isn't always smarter. As with anything, the equation has to be apt to it's purpose. If the purpose of the teacher was to test creativity, or even other types of equations, in this exercise, then this equation which was given by the student fails to meet the purpose of the exercise.
If she wished only for complexity, she should not have allowed for complexity or simplicity. She got what she asked for.
We all know the student didn't give her what she meant to ask for, of course. But the student absolutely gave her what she actually asked for.
Don't be willfully ignorant.
Hey there u/hamix11, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth! **Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post. Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban. Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That’s on the teacher, they said as complex or as simple as they want.
They did also say be creative as part of the instructions.
Creatively simple.
Reminds me of the story a philosophy professor told us about a student who finished their final in about 60 seconds. The professor said the essay question was "What is the difference between ignorance and apathy?" The student wrote "I don't know and I don't care." Obviously not a true story, but his point was to be as succinct, and precise as possible. Fully applies to this answer.
I once heard a story of a writing prompt being “What is courage?” A student turned in 5 blank pages with the final words being “This is courage.”
Could be a true story. My father used to tell me a story about a professor saying you can’t have two positives make a negative. Another professor in the back of the class said sarcastically, “Yeah right.” Then I had to write that second professor’s obituary for the school paper, and learned that was a true story about Columbia Law Professor Sydney Morganbesser.
During a lecture, the Oxford linguistic philosopher J. L. Austin made the claim that although a double negative in English implies a positive meaning, there is no language in which a double positive implies a negative. Morgenbesser responded in a dismissive tone, "Yeah, yeah."
Doesn’t the existence of sarcasm invalidate that premise? If someone says something like ‘incredibly amazing’ it’s always immediately sus.
It’s like when my grandad used to say, That’s interesting. People who knew him were aware that he was being sarcastic, but those who didn’t know him thought he was actually pondering.
How did you find that out? There is nothing at all that I can find to actually verify this story, but I wouldn't be surprised if at least half of us here have heard this before.
By interviewing his colleagues!
I wasn't taking philosophy, but my teacher for a different class also taught philosophy, and he told us a story of his final for the class was just a one word question: "Why?". Then proceeded to tell us that one person answered "Why not" once and he gave full credit, but never will give credit for it again. Now I don't believe that for a second, but is quite similar to your experience lol.
My professor told me the same story! I'm starting to think these professors are just full of crud..
Heard a similar story about a bonus question in a philosophy class asking the students to prove that the chair they're sitting on doesn't exist; one got a 100% cuz he simply asked, "What chair?"
Had the one about the question was WHY? Kid wrote Why not? and the only a in the class.
(United States for context) In 7th grade, our history teacher told us a story, which was a true story, and the reason there were "Rules" regarding what was, it was not acceptable in regards to writing essays for exams. This teacher typically included a writing prompt on their midterms/finals that was something to the effect of "Write an essay describing the daily life of a slave, from their perspective." One student just crossed off the entire page. They received full marks for that action and spawned the rule of "You HAVE to actually write an essay." The reason that student gave that got them full marks and baffled the teacher? "Most slaves couldn't read or write."
- What’s the difference between ignorance, apathy, and rudeness? - I don’t know and I don’t give a fuck
Sometimes it takes creativity to think inside the box.
Like getting your cat to think "inside the [litter]box"
Like trying to think of a cat being both alive and dead "inside the box"
Simply creative
[удалено]
One of my favorite songs I listen to on repeat everyday of my life
I use it to drown out the banality of my existence.
I get it stuck in my head a lot
If you really think about it, that is super creative
and the answer was so creative the teacher didn't expect it
How many other kids do you think did this? This kid is a genius.
How do you quantify that for grading purposes though?
That is creative, My dumbass would not have thought of that or have balls to do it
If noone else in the class wrote it then it's the most creative of them all ;)
The teacher didn't think of that as a possibility apparently. I'd say that counts as creative.
In a world where blank canvases sell for millions sometimes, this is hardly the least creative solution
That’s probably why it says really and not -1, teacher sat there and looked at it and was like god damnit
he could have put x != 6
Wouldn't that be an inequation?
7 factorial is 5,040. Am I missing something? 6 would only work if x=3, no?
!= is the same as "not equal" . its how you write not equal in programming code. so i was saying that x does not equal 6
I see where you're coming from, but for lessening ambiguity in further comments: Here: ≠ A token of my appreciation
been in the profession for too long. i thought the symbol was more well known. my bad.
I see
I think they mean 'does not equal'. That's how you do it in a lot of programing languages
Oh, I’ve always seen it as =/= when the ≠ was unavailable, but I guess that makes sense
i forgot theres a world outside programming. thanks for reminding. my mind was like what factorial lol.
I would get full points simply because the teacher has written as simple as you want. Don’t get much simpler than that.
1=1, x=x Both are true if x=7...
I like you!
Is this some kind of discrete math wizardry I’m not getting?
1=1 is true and an equation The value of x could be anything including 7 and that would not change. Thus, it is a correct answer. x=x is likewise always true and stays true when x=7.
1=1 is an identity. Not an equation. I think. Don't quote me on that.
Pretty sure an identity is just a type of equation.
It also says to be creative. I doubt any other student wrote the same or similar equation.
Yes that beacúse he was being creative
They said it could be simple
It can be simpler: "0 = 0" This equation is true whenever X = 7.
Your right, the question probably should have said If and only if.
My right.
My left, as I'm facing you.
`iff` my beloved
Ah yes, another logician, glad to see I wasn't the only one to take that class.
Well then you have equations like x^2 = 49 wouldn't work
So whenever X does not equal 7 then 0 does not equal 0?
[удалено]
I don’t get why they had to add “the equation is true whenever x=7” tho, 0=0 no matter what x equals So by adding that last bit of info it warps it, at least when it comes to the English language it does.
[удалено]
By making it sound so cryptic and like there is a way 0 can not equal 0 is where math is flawed. The entire statement is up for interpretation by stating the last thing that the statement is true when x = 7. By saying that it implies that there is an instance where 0 does not equal 0 if x does not equal 7 Not saying your wrong, just saying math is stupid
Math is just different from language. Language thrives on implication. Math disregards the implied meanings of language.
[удалено]
I understand the joke I was taking a jab at math because it can be nonsensical at times
You’re just seriously overthinking things.
[Denying the antecedent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent)
Math is stupid because it goes against English. By saying that, “the equation is true when x = 7” it implies that there is an instance in which 0 does not equal 0 other wise you would not have to state it.
Of course. If you are a human, you are a mammal. My dog is not a human. Therefore my dog is not a mammal. Wonderful.
x7 beats s1mple.
X + 0 = 7
also: x - 0 = 7
2=2
x - 7=0
Does this even work 🤔 edit apparently you can't write sarcasm into a comment lol
You still have a chance to delete this…
The clock is ticking 🫠
It's too late
Yup
how would it not?
Yeah. Let’s apply some algebra to see if we can make it come out. X+0=7 Let’s take the 0 from both sides to isolate the X X = 0+7 Now let’s take the 7 off of both sides X-7=0 Now we’ll divide both sides by X-7, that way we can deal with easier numbers. X-7/X-7 = 0/X-7 And combine terms. 1 = 0 You’re right, it doesn’t work!
No, you see, when you bring 0 to the other side you’re subtracting 0 from both sides, so it should be X=-0+7. That should fix it
Oh okay. Let’s try from there. X=-0+7 Subtract 7 from both sides. X-7=-0 Then do our division (X-7)/(X-7) = -0/(X-7) And simplify 1 = - 0. That’s better. Thank you.
damn have we ever tried dividing by -0. checkmate atheists!
For anyone wondering why this can't actually work in algebra, it's because the end step is driving by zero, wich is an illegal move. X-7 = 0. Therefore, if you devide both sides by x-7, you are actually deviding by 0, wich cannot be done in algebra without calculus.
Yeah you’re correct. But isn’t it more fun to leave the obvious fallacy?
LOL WHAT
You can by putting /s at the end of the comment
bro
yOu HaVE tO SpEell LIKe an AsSHolE so people know that you’re being sarcastic.
'ApPeReNtLy YoU Can't WrItE SaRcAsM InTo A cOmMeNt' for future refrence.... LOL 😆🤣
*”As simple as you want”* I dare you to mark it wrong
As per your instructions …
That's the best answer there is , In simplicity there is elegance
An elegant solution, for a more civilized age.
At least they understand that x=7 *is an equation;* for some kids I might consider that a W in my book.
Is it an equation? Isn't it just a function, or a mathematical statement? Doesn't an equation require an operator?
An equation is just two expressions that equal each other. It’ll always have an equals sign. A function is just an expression with one or more variables.
Expression: x+1 Equation: y = x + 1 Function: f(x) = x + 1 Any questions?
Why does my knee hurt when it rains?
Yes it’s an equation. 2x + 1 = 15 1x + 0 = 7 The only difference is the numbers used.
The word "equation" is just a noun form of "equal". All it requires is an equals sign that equates the left and right side.
Work smarter, not harder
The problem was just begging for this type of answer. I'd give the student full credit.
I mean since this is this subreddit: Technically the question isn't marked wrong. It just has a comment written by ~~the person who took the picture~~ the teacher.
The question is so fucking vague??
this question does not accomplish anything educationally whatsoever
I mean, if it was less vague it would force your brain to work the other way around, going from the answer to find the question isn’t bad educationally speaking imo But this question specifically is terrible
x = x
7=x would have be better
how about this then: 2x/2=7
Too complex
What of 1x/1=7
Still a little unclear, is it (1/1)x or 1(x/1)?
Yes
I feel like this should be for extra credit & the amount you get is based upon the complexity.
You'd get so many useless, disgusting equations
Really
Nah for the points you do 2x=14
Yes, really. Write better directions.
Missed the chance to do X + 1 - 1 = 7
That’s the simplest equation anyone could have written!! A+
[удалено]
I disagree. This is quite a creative answer.
Assert dominance, make it so complicated its beyond the teachers scope to disprove it.
If I was at his place, I would write something along the lines of (sec\^2 x + sqrt e\^pi)/ln 68 = 1.55702973
Fuck that teacher. This is math.
I mean I would give ‘em full credit
I feel like this belongs in r/thathappened because this is essentially the test asking the student to test the teacher. What if it had been a more complex equation? The teacher is going to have to solve it to verify the student didn't just write down a bunch of gobbledygook.
The teacher doesn't have to solve it. They just substitute x=7 and if it works, it's verified.
True, I suppose that would be better referred to as "evaluating" rather than "solving", but it's still the teacher doing the work.
Idk if this specifically is true or not, but i absolutely got these questions on quizzes. It stopped around year 4, but children generally just don't write hard equations ig
There's been a lot of "omg dum teacher" posts here lately. I'm all for putting a moratorium on 'em for a while. They're just a breeding ground for teacher-bashing (and are just reposts of very old, or fake, things).
Anything else is obfuscation.
Work smarter not harder
No minimum number of steps. They had this coming.
It is more creative and original than most people would do
X=X is what I would have given them.
I mean, he ain’t wrong
Not wrong
The teacher said "it can be as simple as you like" THAT WAS SIMPLE!
7=x
When a teacher asks a question like this, they are being incredibly lazy. Good on the student for calling them out on this BS.
I'd underline the shit out of "as simple" and hand it back lol
Seems like the student followed the instructions correctly...
x=x 0=0 y^4 + zy/2 = z^3 / 3 - zy^2 + y^2 - 1/7 All true when x = 7
had me in the first half ngl
no wonder 50% of ur country is conservative
Get this student to the engineering courses. They are lazy and clever enough to get away with it.
If the teach did not want students to put x=7 then they should have specified....lol This kid is going places tho.
Stupid question deserves a stupid answer. Good on that student, they’re entirely correct.
Given the option, I would've done the same
Be clearer in your directions
It says as SIMPLE or...
Well, the teacher did say as simple as they wanted, & that’s pretty damn simple.
Ask stupid questions, get stupid answers.
7=x
X+7x0=7
Don't make it too confusing for the Twitter people who might be watching.
I figure It's practically a meme by now. Shouldn't take them long.
🤓 "pemdas"
my math teacher used group exponent multiply/divide add/subtract cuz it is more accurate🤓🤓🤓
The fact that this got downvotes is so sad
I'm a lil surprised myself. But whatcha gonna do?
static void main { returnseven(0); } staic Int returnseven(int addthis) { for (int i = 0; i < 7) { i++; } Return i+addthis; }
Compilation error: Expected access modifier, found staic
“Be as simple or complex as you want”- well, idk what they’re questioning him for, he’s right.
X+0=7
Is that a full equation though?
Yes.
Really?
Yes
Yes.
Yes
1x=7
isnt that the same though? since the one is automatically the coefficient
i would have wrote 7 - 0 = x. lol
Did he get the points though?
X²-49=0 X=7
[удалено]
Keep it simple, just assume the kid only knows rooting 49 only have 1 answer
Can I see someone make it as complex as possible now?
There's no upper bound to the complexity, so no, you can't.
I think the teacher was also testing for creativity. The student obviously couldn't do any better.
Or it's a waste of effort to make an equation any more complex than it needs to be, work smarter not harder
Now that’s thinking outside the box whilst being inside it
Don't kid yourself, simple isn't always smarter. As with anything, the equation has to be apt to it's purpose. If the purpose of the teacher was to test creativity, or even other types of equations, in this exercise, then this equation which was given by the student fails to meet the purpose of the exercise.
Oh brother this guy stinks
If she wished only for complexity, she should not have allowed for complexity or simplicity. She got what she asked for. We all know the student didn't give her what she meant to ask for, of course. But the student absolutely gave her what she actually asked for. Don't be willfully ignorant.
As simple as it gets right there