grade schoolers learn PEMDAS as an acronym for order of operations (parentheses, exponents, multiply and divide, add and subtract), but this doesn't tell what order to read expressions involving trig or logarithm
In general, from my experience
[imath]sin x^2[/imath] is read as [imath]sin (x^2)[/imath], not [imath](sinx)^2[/imath]
and sin 2x is read as sin(2x) not (sin2)x
The first case shows that when x is affected by a trig function and an exponent, the exponent is applied first.
The second shows that when 2 is affected by a trig function and multiplication, the trig function is applied first.
From this, we can generalize that the trig function is applied after exponents but before multiplication, so we can revise pemdas to peTLmdas (trig and logs).
Of course this is a strictly arbitrary decision of notation. While I've seen the order for pemdas in many early textbooks, I've never seen the order for trig and logs stated formally. Is that a gap in my education or a common gap in instruction? For me, it was so severe that when I was assigned the derivative of [imath]sin x^2[/imath] I actually worked out both possible interpretations then used the textbook solution to reverseengineer the intend order of operations and [imath]sin(3x)^2[/imath] still leaves me unsettled, but I understand it's read as [imath]sin[(3x)^2][/imath].
How about a movement to ban [imath]sin x^2[/imath] and only use [imath]sin(x^2)[/imath], [imath](sinx)^2[/imath], or [imath]sin^2x[/imath]
[imath]sin^2x[/imath] is a ridiculous written notation, by the way, but makes fantastic sense when spoken to clearly distinguish itself from [imath]sin(x^2)[/imath]
Order of operations for trig, logarithms
Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

 Posts: 139
 Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:36 pm UTC
 Location: Fremont, CA
Order of operations for trig, logarithms
Last edited by oblivimous on Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:33 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

 Posts: 1466
 Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
That's not really an issue of Order of Operations so much as unclear notation. It's the same reason 2^2 could either be 4 or 4 depending on whether you meant (2^2) or (2)^2
That's why i generally use grouping symbols when i use functions. I would write it as sin2x or logx^2
I don't know where i got the habit of using straight lines rather than parens, but i did so bite me!
That's why i generally use grouping symbols when i use functions. I would write it as sin2x or logx^2
I don't know where i got the habit of using straight lines rather than parens, but i did so bite me!
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
oblivimous wrote:grade schoolers learn PEMDAS as an acronym for order of operations (parentheses, exponents, multiply and divide, add and subtract), but this doesn't tell what order to read expressions involving trig or logarithm
[imath]sin x^2[/imath] is read as [imath]sin (x^2)[/imath], not [imath](sinx)^2[/imath]
and sin 2x is read as sin(2x) not (sin2)x
The first case shows that when x is affected by a trig function and an exponent, the exponent is applied first.
The second shows that when 2 is affected by a trig function and multiplication, the trig function is applied first.
No, it shows that the multiplication is applied first. Of course, sin x sin y is not read as sin (x sin y), so it's all a little weird.
From this, we can generalize that the trig function is applied after exponents but before multiplication, so we can revise pemdas to peTLmdas (trig and logs).
Of course this is a strictly arbitrary decision of notation. While I've seen the order for pemdas in many early textbooks, I've never seen the order for trig and logs stated formally. Is that a gap in my education or a common gap in instruction? For me, it was so severe that when I was assigned the derivative of [imath]sin x^2[/imath] I actually worked out both possible interpretations then used the textbook solution to reverseengineer the intend order of operations.
It's not formally stated in most books. The general convention is that for written functions, the precedence is between multiplication and addition, so foo xy = foo (xy) but foo x + y = (foo x) + y. Exponentiation pretty much always gets precedence (someone might argue with me over logs just because log (x^2) = 2 log x). Best though to use brackets to make things clear.
Trig functions are even worse, because for most functions, foo^2 x means foo(foo(x)), but sin^2 x means (sin x)^2. But this is unique to trig functions because they are so rarely applied to themselves, but often raised to a power (except 1, and sin^1 is usually taken to mean the same thing as foo^1, that is, the inverse function! So trig functions have all sorts of weird rules.)
Spambot5546 wrote:That's why i generally use grouping symbols when i use functions. I would write it as sin2x or logx^2
I don't know where i got the habit of using straight lines rather than parens, but i did so bite me!
Ok, I will! 2x means the absolute value of 2x. You can't just use your own notation and expect to be understood.
Spambot5546 wrote:That's not really an issue of Order of Operations so much as unclear notation. It's the same reason 2^2 could either be 4 or 4 depending on whether you meant (2^2) or (2)^2
Yeah, except that's exactly the kind of problem order of operations is meant to solve. How is that different than wondering if 1 + 2*3 means (1+2)*3 or 1+(2*3)?
addams wrote:This forum has some very well educated people typing away in loops with Sourmilk. He is a lucky Sourmilk.
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
Yeah, never do this. Not only is it overloaded, it totally eliminates the main benefit of parentheses, which is that the opening and closing delimiters are different. So you can write sinxx+3logx+1 without it being impossible to read (and ambiguous)mikel wrote:Spambot5546 wrote:That's why i generally use grouping symbols when i use functions. I would write it as sin2x or logx^2
I don't know where i got the habit of using straight lines rather than parens, but i did so bite me!
Ok, I will! 2x means the absolute value of 2x. You can't just use your own notation and expect to be understood.
EDIT:
It's only different in that people disagree on it. Everyone knows in that in theory, [imath]2^2 = 4[/imath]. But that doesn't mean that in practice, people use that convention in their writing. Similarly, when one sees [imath]1/2x[/imath], it almost never means [imath]0.5x[/imath], even though everyone knows that multiplication and division are leftassociative.Yeah, except that's exactly the kind of problem order of operations is meant to solve. How is that different than wondering if 1 + 2*3 means (1+2)*3 or 1+(2*3)?
Last edited by ++$_ on Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:45 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

 Posts: 139
 Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:36 pm UTC
 Location: Fremont, CA
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
mikel wrote:No, it shows that the multiplication is applied first.
Shamed. I'll refrain from destroying the evidence of my blunder by edit, it would cause subsequent posts to no longer make sense.
pemdTLas
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
oblivimous wrote:mikel wrote:No, it shows that the multiplication is applied first.
Shamed. I'll refrain from destroying the evidence of my blunder by edit, it would cause subsequent posts to no longer make sense.
pemdTLas
No worries, still a valid question. And trig in particular breaks a lot of rules.
addams wrote:This forum has some very well educated people typing away in loops with Sourmilk. He is a lucky Sourmilk.
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
Haha, I remember learning that in grade school , and I asked my teacher, ''What about logarithms and sins (I didn't know of the word ''trigonometric functions'' back then)?''oblivimous wrote:grade schoolers learn PEMDAS as an acronym for order of operations (parentheses, exponents, multiply and divide, add and subtract), but this doesn't tell what order to read expressions involving trig or logarithm
How about a movement to ban [imath]sin x^2[/imath] and only use [imath]sin(x^2)[/imath], [imath](sinx)^2[/imath], or [imath]sin^2x[/imath]
How about we ban sinx nonsense altogether? Why the hate on parentheses?
oblivimous wrote:[imath]sin^2x[/imath] is a ridiculous written notation, by the way, but makes fantastic sense when spoken to clearly distinguish itself from [imath]sin(x^2)[/imath]
I disagree. The only thing I don't like about sin^2(x) is the special case of sin^1(x), which, really, should always be written as arcsin(x), or asin(x).
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
++$_ wrote:Everyone knows in that in theory, [imath]2^2 = 4[/imath].
What?
wee free kings
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
If I see 2^2 without further clarification, I'm always going to assume it's 4. That's just your basic pedmas at work.
I think for trig and log functions, they're most often used in application (either as an application within higher maths [i.e. all the trig functions in fourier transforms], or physics or another applied science), and so context makes it clear what is meant, rather than explicit rules. When first learning about those functions at all, I was always drilled on use of parenthesis everywhere, not so much to avoid ambiguity, but rather to emphisize that 'sin' wasn't a function (in contrast to sin[stuff]).
And really, where I'm from, those functions only show up in the last couple years of high school, so you're not going to get particularly complicated expressions where there might be amibiguity anyway. Grabbing my first year calc book too, and checking out random contextless problems involving trig functions, they all seem to be good about useing parentheses to be clear, so it may be that really you always 'should' be using parenetheses, it's just since people are lazy and context is good enough, they're usually omitted.
I think for trig and log functions, they're most often used in application (either as an application within higher maths [i.e. all the trig functions in fourier transforms], or physics or another applied science), and so context makes it clear what is meant, rather than explicit rules. When first learning about those functions at all, I was always drilled on use of parenthesis everywhere, not so much to avoid ambiguity, but rather to emphisize that 'sin' wasn't a function (in contrast to sin[stuff]).
And really, where I'm from, those functions only show up in the last couple years of high school, so you're not going to get particularly complicated expressions where there might be amibiguity anyway. Grabbing my first year calc book too, and checking out random contextless problems involving trig functions, they all seem to be good about useing parentheses to be clear, so it may be that really you always 'should' be using parenetheses, it's just since people are lazy and context is good enough, they're usually omitted.
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
I should probably go to sleepQaanol wrote:++$_ wrote:Everyone knows in that in theory, [imath]2^2 = 4[/imath].
What?
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
I really detest the lazy notation such as cos x or ln x, ln 2, cos 3.2, etc. To me ln, log, sin, cos, etc. are names of functions, and proper function notation is f(x). One would never write f 3 when meaning f(3), so why write cos 2 when meaning cos(2). It's because of pure laziness. If it's a function, use proper function notation. I make it a habit when in class to always use parentheses after trig functions and logarithms to hopefully impart to my students that they are just two or three letter names for functions , and should be used as such, instead of the usual one letter name. Who knows if it's fruitful or not. Just my own little crusade.
CHUCK
CHUCK
Re: Order of operations for trig, logarithms
heh..funny thread.
I think one of the reason brackets aren't always used is because although strict bracket use may remove ambiguity, it also makes long equations harder to read and write, so there's a tradeoff for useability. The main thing is that you are consistent and clear, and so is your audience (e.g. your teachers or your students). Something like "sin2x" is pretty clear to me without having to use brackets because it's a very common shortcut, but "sin2 x" wouldn't be because of that extra space and uncommon useage.
And Chuck, I have to disagree with you on the shorthand for functions. For example when doing operations on functions themselves people often just use the function name. For example in the multiplication rule for derivatives. [fg]' = f'g + fg'.
I think one of the reason brackets aren't always used is because although strict bracket use may remove ambiguity, it also makes long equations harder to read and write, so there's a tradeoff for useability. The main thing is that you are consistent and clear, and so is your audience (e.g. your teachers or your students). Something like "sin2x" is pretty clear to me without having to use brackets because it's a very common shortcut, but "sin2 x" wouldn't be because of that extra space and uncommon useage.
And Chuck, I have to disagree with you on the shorthand for functions. For example when doing operations on functions themselves people often just use the function name. For example in the multiplication rule for derivatives. [fg]' = f'g + fg'.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests