>Tracy,
>
>You are free to believe anything you like, but in this case you believe the wrong thing. *s*
>
>Think of it as the sign of the number is more tightly bound to the number than any operator operating on the number. It defines which side of zero a number is on. Consider this valid expression:
>
>1 + -2 - -3
>
>it evaluates to 2
>
>it is equivalent to
>
>1 - 2 + 3

Ok, now rewrite it as 1 + -1*2 - -1*3 and the result is:

TaDaaaaa: 2 - same thing. The rules of precedence are preserved.

Now, explain to me this "tightly bound" theory. I don't remember seeing that in any text books or math papers. ;)

>
>If the schools are adding to the innumeracy of the US it's a truly sad situation indeed.
>
>>I believe that unary negation has a lower precedence than exponentiation. I think it is included in the rules for binary operations so it is not spelled out in PEMDAS.
>>
>>I don't think we can go by any programming language's rules of precendence because each language determines its own and it doesn't always match that of math .
>>
>>For example, -4^2 = -(4^2) = -16 NOT (-4)^2 = 16
>>
>>That's from my daughter's math worksheets :o) So, if it is wrong, blame her teacher or the math books her teacher used :o)