>Does PEMDAS really say to change -2 to 0-2, then make the 0 a term by itself and combine the 2 with the power of 2?
>
>Put another way, the parenthesis were not there; you put them there.

But by the same token, when you insist that -2^2 is 4, you are putting virtual parens around -2, so (-2)^2. That's why the rules exist - so that we all do the same things. Without the parens, from everything I've read, -2 represents -1*2, so the equation becomes -1*2^2 and pedmas then applies with exponentiation taking precedence over multiplication.

>
>>Using PEMDAS:
>>
>>-2^2 = 0-2^2 = 0-(2^2) = 0 - (4) = -4
>>
>>???
>>
>>:o)
>>
>>
>>>Tracy,
>>>
>>>If you can provide a cogent argument to this I'll hop down off my soapbox of stubborness and admit defeat. *g*
>>>
>>>Math is full of opposites, yin and yang if you like.
>>>
>>>addition ... subtraction
>>>multiplication ... division
>>>positive ... negative
>>>
>>>In the beginning man only had a concept for positive numbers... Og the cave man could "count" that he had one wood club, three children and seven eggs to eat for breakfast. And thus began math. He could gather more eggs and so addition became understandable. He could take away some of the eggs from the basket to eat and so subtraction became understandable. Division followed soon after as a means of splitting up the eggs among the family at breakfast. Multiplication is a little more abstract because that's more something in the future.. how many eggs do I need to feed my family for the next week? But Og being a good provider ultimately grokked multiplication... But negative numbers? How absurd! How can you take away more eggs than you have? It's just not possible. Democratic politicians come along much later and freely invent negative money to solve all sorts of problems. (sorry I couldn't resist the urge)
>>>
>>>Sometime later mathematicians evolve and they concieve that there is a number line that doesn't just look like:
>>>
>>>0 .. 1 .. 2 .. 3 .. 4 .. infinity
>>>
>>>but that there is a side opposite 0 so the number line is redrawn
>>>
>>>infinity .. 4 .. 3 .. 2 .. 1 .. 0 .. 1 .. 2 .. 3 .. 4 .. infinity
>>>
>>>But the numbers on the left of 0 need to distinguished somehow from those on the right of 0.. so positive and negative signed numbers are concieved
>>>
>>>-infinity .. -4 .. -3 .. -2 .. -1 .. 0 .. +1 .. +2 .. +3 .. +4 .. +infinity
>>>
>>>But we'd been writing plain old 2 for so long and people didn't want to go through all the extra work to carve + symbols into all those stone tablets so they decided as a shorthand that when we write just a 2 that we really mean +2.
>>>
>>>Now back to math on the UT in 2008
>>>
>>>The mathematical expression:
>>>

2

>>>means the positive number 2
>>>
>>>The mathematical expression:
>>>

+2

>>>also means the positive number 2
>>>
>>>The mathematical expression:
>>>

-2

>>>means the negative number 2 ... it does NOT mean negate the positive number 2.. that is an equivalent mathematical operation but it's not the definition.
>>>
>>>The mathematical expression:
>>>

2^2

>>>means the positive number 2 times itself
>>>
>>>The mathematical expression:
>>>

+2^2

>>>means the positive number 2 times itself
>>>
>>>The mathematical expression:
>>>

-2^2

>>>means the negative number 2 times itself ... to interpret this in any other way violates the most basic concepts of mathematics.
>>>
>>>The opposite of negation isn't "positation" it's absolute value and they chose the much less ambiguous symbology of |x| for this operation.
>>>
>>>I'm not talking about programming languages at all.. In fact a lot of parsers fail when trying to read valid math expressions.
>>>
>>>>Dr Math is a forum hosted by Drexel University but has participants from all over the U.S..
>>>>
>>>>So forget Dr Math. Your interpretation is the common programming language one, not mathematics. In mathematics, if there are no parenthesis to specify, exponentiation takes precedence over unary. That is from the math books, not any programming language.
>>>>
>>>>-2^2 written is by order of precedence:
>>>>
>>>>-(2^2) = -4 *mathematics
>>>>or
>>>>(-2) ^2 = 4 *some programming languages which matches your interpretation
>>>>
>>>>I still stand by -2^2 = -(2^2) = -4 by the mathematics order of precendence because no parenthesis were used to specify otherwise. Your interpretation is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>>So be it. I am as stubborn as you until some reliable mathematics source contradicts my mathematics books I have here. :o) It is the same in my daugther's study guides for the SAT as well.