You’re old school, like me. You’re literally describing the “new math” that boomers hate. Teachers are finally teaching kids to do it the way we’ve always done it in our head.
“8 + 7 is awkward, but if you take two from seven and give it to eight, now you have 10 + 5 and that’s easy mental math.”
And the reason they teach it that way is because it’s what the people who are good at math were already doing. Math isn’t about memorization it’s about understanding how numbers work and that’s how numbers work
I like the way the second ADHD method is also a flip on the “seven ate nine” dad joke
No no no. Adding nine is just subtracting one, but adding to the front digit. 9 + 7 is actually 7 - 1=6, then add that 1 to the front. 16. Let’s not make more complicated than it needs to be.
9+7=10+7-1=16
10 is just easier for me to work with so…
9+1=10 10+7=17 17-1=16
This picture just describes the ‘new math’ that everyone bemoans.
No no no 10+7 = 17 and 9 is always one less so 16
Intellectuals, apparently: easy math
You, with ADHD: I like my easy math with an extra step or two
Me, literally clinically insane: preeeeeetty sure I find a way to solve that using the factorializing of transfinites and [TREE]3 somehow, maybe not
Googologers: HOLD MY UN/COUNTABLE INFINITIES, BITCH
7+9=7-(10-9)+10
Someone, usually a person (speaking in italibold): not like that, you heathen
It took me 3 years to pass HS algebra because the coaches/part-time math teachers didn’t like the way I solved problems. I got the right answers. But the way I got them was wrong apparently.
Me, bad at math: yeah they taught us that as a way to do in grade school.
If your teacher gets mad about breaking an addition problem into easier problems, then that teacher should be fired. Phony tale.
But they posted in italibold, which makes it 420.69% leejit. pwned.
If anything, these are exactly the techniques that “New Math” was supposed to teach. Your brain doesn’t work math the same way as a computer. People who are good at math tend to break the whole thing down into simple pieces like this. New Math was developed by studying what they did and then teaching that to everyone.
I tend to add 9 to things by bumping the tens digit up by one (7 becomes 17) and then subtracting 1 (17 becomes 16).
Most of the arguments against New Math tended to prove the point; our mathematical education was in dire need of fixing.
The second method is very chemistry-like. I do that too naturally
I thought that too, 9 is like a halogen, it wants to resolve to 10 anyway it can like fluorine wants one last electron. So allow the 9 to rip one off of the neighboring numbers and then perform the calculation.
I’ve never really liked the anthropomorphic description of chemical bonding, but maybe it’s actually similar to the addition thing. On the one hand, we can say 9 wants to resolve to 10 and takes a 1, and on the other hand we could say there are a bunch of different ways we could rearrange these numbers but the end result is the same as if we resolve 9 to 10 first. Maybe chemical reactions are similar, so there’s a bunch of configurations that could have happened, but the end result is the same as if we had said fluorine wants that last electron
Although, electron affinity is a thing… so the analogy does break down pretty quick. Rip
Yo but hear me out. Because 7 ate(8) 9, 7 + 9 = 7
deleted by creator
