>Jim,
>
>This has diverged so far and I've not read every message. But I have to just plain disagree with most people posting here.
>
>-2^2 is negative two squared.. it is not the negative of two squared.
Agreed. It's not really the negative of 2 squared. It's negative 1 times 2 squared. As far as most of the people posting who say what I'm saying, the info comes from math sources (texts, professors, engineers etc.). I know it seem counter-intuitive and initially, I agreed with your view, but so far, not one legitimate math source I've seen agrees; so afaic, I was wrong, and the texts etc are right.
>
>The sign is bound to the number.
>
>What would y'all say if the problem was written +2^2? It's the same thing with opposite sign, it is positive two squared, not the positive of two squared.
>
>>>Metin,
>>>
>>>> but online math calculator, my math. eng. friend and my daughter say -4... :(
>>>
>>>They are all wrong. The answer is 4.
>>>
>>>The unary negation operation has higher precedence than exponentiation.
>>>
>>>I order for the answer to be -4, the expression would have to be -(2**2) using parens in order to force the exponentiation to happen first.
>>
>>This is a very interresting discussion. I would have gone along with you on the unary operator being a higher precedence than exponentiation. However, after reading this thread adn the supporting links to the various arguments I am beginning to agree with the idea that unary sign is at the precedence evel of multiplication and division.
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement