>> If anyone does disagree, please explain why.
>> Original =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=
 =A0 =A0 =A0Transposed version
>> A =3D 6 / 2 * (1 + 2) =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0A =3D (1 + 2) * 6 / 2

> This interchange is only correct if the intention of the original equatio=
n is A =3D (6/2)*(1+2).
>
> If the intention of the original equation is A =3D 6/(2 * (1 + 2)) then R=
ussells interchange does not work, and this could well be the intention of =
the original equation, as someone else noted a hand written version would h=
ave made this a lot clearer.

Intentions are of no consequence in determining mathematical truth :-)

I argued that multiplication is commutative - as it is in our
universally accepted mathematical system. .
To "intend" that an equation breaks this rule is to utilise "the new
mathematics".


                  Russell

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.