• Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yeah stuff like that really ain’t it. It works in a few use cases, but is objectively wrong and detracts from understanding the topic properly. That’s why I teach percentages as the fractions they are. By the time you learn percentages, you already know multiplying fractions is commutative, so the trick still works, and you also understand why.

      • Yeah stuff like that really ain’t it

        Yes it is

        It works in a few use cases,

        It works in every case where you have multiplying and dividing, including fractions and percentages

        but is objectively wrong

        No it isn’t

        detracts from understanding the topic properly

        Enhances it actually

        That’s why I teach percentages as the fractions they are.

        Sounds like you’re only teaching as much as you understand. Try understanding more. Students love the tricks that make Maths easier, including this one.

        • Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          That’s pi/100 still. Didn’t say it was a rational number, just that it was a fraction. Though I don’t see a context where it’d make sense.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      % really just means *1/100 - it doesn’t matter where you apply that factor: 6% of 50 = 6% * 50 = 6/100 * 50 = 6*50/100 = 6 * 50/100

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 days ago

          I was probably on a different continent ^^ Also, the biggest problem explaining math is not making it understandable, but having a motivated learner. Most students that have a bad teacher in school, or are somehow not motivated in school to begin with, will also not be motivated to focus on easier explanations. Technically a basic interest in math should be fostered / encouraged in kids from an early age, and at the latest in elementary school. If that does not work out, many students will have a hard time with it.

          You are welcome.

  • Clot@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    maths is the same in both case but I get it, for small numbers this is useful

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 days ago

      I guess it’s easy to miss that m% just means ×m÷100

      6% of 50 means 50 × 6 ÷ 100, and because multiplication and division have the same order of operations you can switch them around. so it is also equal to 6 × 50 ÷ 100, in which you can simplify 50 ÷ 100 into 1 ÷ 2, but you could always do that: 50 × 6 ÷ 100 = 1 × 6 ÷ 2.

      this “shortcut” however is of extremely limited use. basically for taking a percentage of anything other than things that can very easily divide or multiply 100 like 50 in this example or maybe 10 or 500 it’s nearly useless.

  • wabasso@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    104
    ·
    8 days ago

    x/100 * y = x * 1/100 * y = x * y/100

    I never would have thought of it myself and still feel like I should have thought of it myself.

    • chocrates@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 days ago

      So 37 % of 38 is equivalent to (37 * 38 ) / 100 ? Which I can almost do in my head.

      37 * 4 is 148 I think, so 37 * 40 is 1480. Subtract 74 we have 1406. So we have 14.06?

      • wabasso@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        For a while I’ve been meaning to memorize all the two digit squares but of course I then fail to practice them, so I’m not very far along. But that would help you with this too, not to mention you can start doing some square roots too.

        For quick and dirty I’d probably just go with 37*38 = 40*40 -> 16% which is kinda close to 14% eh?

      • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        Pretty close to 1/4 of 52, so like 13-ish, but maybe closer to 12.

        (13 + 0.25 - 0.53 - 0.53, really. If I had to, I might be able to keep that in my head.)

        • minkymunkey_7_7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          May as well just get out the calculator app to make sure. My point with those numbers is to just use a calculator. Why 2nd guess anything?

          • May as well just get out the calculator app to make sure

            Calculator apps get order of operations questions wrong because of programmers who were too lazy to check they had their Maths correct

            My point with those numbers is to just use a calculator.

            My point is avoid calculator apps like the plague. Use name brands like Sharp or Casio.

            Why 2nd guess anything?

            Guess what the programmer of your calculator app did 😂

          • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            If “close enough” works, then it’s nice to have the skill. Having the skill requires occasionally using it.

            Where accuracy is important, since we almost always have a calculator with us now, that’s a no-brainer.

            Maybe more to the point, though, understanding how percentages work is wise. It’s one of the few arithmetic topics that we encounter regularly in life.

            In this case, 23% of 53 and 53% of 23 each have their own little trick, depending whether you’d rather overestimate a little with 1/4 of 52 or underestimate a little with half of 24. I find it handy to be able to think that way, especially for example when trying to get out of a taxi and paying cash.

  • infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    8 days ago

    Legitimately new knowledge for me that will literally make my work easier. Wish I could give you more than 100% of 1 upvote, OP!

  • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    8 days ago

    That’s because multiplication is commutative

    taking a percentage of something essentially means multiplying it with a hundreath of the percentage
    6% of 50 essentially means 50 * 0.06
    or 50 * 6 * 0.01

    and since
    50 * 6 * 0.01 = 6 * 50 * 0.01
    then of course
    50 * 0.06 = 6 * 0.5

    And we have the above

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 days ago

      Yeah my brain just sees 5*6, and then I move the decimal. I never understood how people couldn’t figure out tips when they wanted 20%.

      If you live in the U.S. you do them quite often, multiply by 2. Want 10 multiply by .1… Half that and add it if you want 15. Whatever is easiest at that moment

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 days ago

      I prefer to keep it technically correct yet evil and confusing. 6% being a fancy way to write 0.06 or 6 * 1/100 means we can take 6 * 50 * 1/100 and simplify to 300 * 1/100 and then represent that as 300%.

    • Johandea@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      … in 1 or 2 dimensional number systems, also known as the real (1-dimension) and the complex (2-dimensions) numbers. With quaternions and higher dimensional systems multiplication is not communicative. In fact, the more dimensions you add, another mathematical property is lost.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        … okay? Yes? Nobody thought otherwise? Do we now have to clarify every statement about algebra by specifying that we’re talking about an algebra over the reals or the complex numbers? Or the polynomials or the p-adic integers, whose multiplications are also commutative?

        No one would call these “n-dimensional” number systems either. The algebra for each of these operates in R1 and R2, respectively, but, like, you would describe their algebras as being over an n-dimensional vector space. It’s not wrong, but I don’t think “two-dimensional number system” is something you’d hear mathematicians say.

        This pedantic aside feels so “I just watched a 3blue1brown video and feel verysmart™” that I don’t know what to do with it. It’s good to be interested in math, but this ain’t it. Everyone knew what they meant.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 days ago

      Or, more generally:

      Taking X percent of something is the same as multiplying by X/100.

      X percent of Y = Y(X/100)=(YX)/100

      Y percent of X = X(Y/100)=(XY)/100

      (YX)/100=(XY)/100

      Percentages are indeed reversible.

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Yes, 47% of 47 is certainly much easier to determine when you look at it as 47% of 47! Genius!

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      You can also

      Multiply one side, divide the other to get the base number to get the base number to 100.

      6% of 50 == 3% of 100 == 3

      5% of 20 == 1% of 100 == 1

      7% of 50 == 3.5℅ of 100 == 3.5

      14% of 200 == 7% of 100 == 7

      Edit* as pointed out below, this one was incorrect.

      14% of 200 == 28% of 100 == 28

      You don’t have to stop at percentage either.

      25 * 16 = 100 * 4

      If you’re doing addition, you can add and subtract.

      27 + 13 = 20 + 20

      Most of the difficulty is in realizing that one number or the other can be brought up to a nice round number, making the equation simple to do in your head. And obviously, just getting to around number on one side doesn’t always make it easy on the other side.

      I always loved screwing with math problems to make them easier, which is weird, because overall, I don’t really care for math.

      I also do shit like borrowing a couple of numbers to make the equation easy and then pull them back out.

      392 / 4 == (400 - 8) / 4 == (100-2) = 98

      376 / 4 == (400-24)/4 =100-6=94

      Of course it goes up a level when the remainder isn’t evenly divisible. But I still find it’s something I can handle in my head.

      371 / 4 == (400-29)/4= 100-7¼ =100-7.25=92.75

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          I would argue you’re still doing the other side just subliminally. But it is a fair point.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Oh shit, there I go getting along winded and get lost, yep, that should have been multiplied on the other side.

      • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Are you just out here doing common core math on here like it’s just some smart trick to make math easier?! You dirty bastard, some conservative is going to see this and think it’s a good idea, then they’ll just innocently do it in front of their conservative friends and all hell will break loose. Homosexual fornication will suddenly run rampant through the group and those few that can resist the call of the devils numbers will have to cull the rest. You know… Actually… I am not completely against that now that I think about it…

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Rofl, I pre-date common core. I’m not exactly sure to what extent they do all that stuff. I do know that they’ve got a fuck of a lot of numberlines, like so many number lines. Like they’re being paid by the number line.

          Back in the 80s and 90s, the teachers would do regular scrolling down arithmetic, and they would mention borrowing numbers and shortcuts. And I took that shit seriously because I did not like sitting down and adding/multiplying numbers. I’d probably spend an extra 30 seconds of problem if I thought I could not have to sit down and write equations.

          • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            That’s really cool. The borrowing thing is the part of common core that they teach in elementary, and it is the part that enrages conservatives. The point of the homework and practice questions is to repeatedly do the borrowing thing until it becomes automatic and something that they do in their heads all of the time. So, it absolutely enrages the right when kids get the correct answer, but lose points for doing the problem the wrong way.
            I was taught to do it the hard way and had to figure out the other tricks for myself much later in life, so now, even after decades of doing it your way, it’s more of a struggle than it should be and I just reach for my calculator instead. So I envy you quite a bit.

            Keep up the good work with your subversive teaching of common core principles as tips, tricks, cheats and shortcuts. That’s actually how they should have branded it, instead of common core, it should have been cheating core, then they would have been all for it.

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              There’s nothing wrong with calculators.

              I wonder if the next generation is going to be reaching for AI for all their English needs.

              • There’s nothing wrong with calculators

                There is if you’re talking about calculators on phones, etc. Almost all of them give wrong answers to order of operations questions because the programmer didn’t bother checking their Maths first. It’s so bad that the Windows calculator in Standard mode says 2+3x4=20. Stick to name brands like Sharp and Casio. They have money invested in the success of their products, so they take more care to make sure it’s correct!

              • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 days ago

                I haven’t sent anything to anyone that wasn’t spell checked in more than a decade. So, ya it’s going to be a weird future where you just choose the comment you want to respond to and AI fills it out for you.

                • rumba@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  Ohh man, think of training something on your own corpus of writing over the years.

                  god we could probably more or less do that now…