A question about rules of multiplication

In summary, the discussion revolves around the fundamental rules of multiplication, including the commutative, associative, and distributive properties, which govern how numbers can be multiplied and combined. These rules help simplify calculations and understand the relationships between numbers in various mathematical contexts.
  • #1
logicgate
10
2
TL;DR Summary
Why is it that x times yz equals xyz and not xyxz ?
This might sound like a stupid question but I am just wondering why is it that x times yz equals xyz and not xyxz ? Why don't we distribute multiplication in this case ?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Think back to the simplest meaning or way to understand Multiplication. Maybe try a known numbers simple example.

Why is it that 3 times 7*8 equals 3*7*8 and is not 3*7*3*8 ?

You can first show 7+7+7+7+7+7+7+7 and find that this is 56.
(Same thing can be expressed as 8+8+8+8+8+8+8.)

You can now show 3*56 to be 56+56+56 (excuse me if I not stayed in the same form.) And what is this resulting number value? 168.


You can also choose to show that example graphically or visually.

That should help!


---
small edit done
 
  • #3
Here is multiplication in real life:

  1. I lay down 8 blocks in a row.
  2. I want to multiply that by 7, so I copy step 1 six more times, making a total of 7 columns of 8-block rows.
  3. I want to multiply that by 3, so I copy step 1 and 2 twice more, making the 7x8 matrix a total of 3 times, stacked.

Why would I multiply by 3 again?
 
  • Like
Likes logicgate
  • #4
logicgate said:
TL;DR Summary: Why is it that x times yz equals xyz and not xyxz ?

This might sound like a stupid question but I am just wondering why is it that x times yz equals xyz and not xyxz ? Why don't we distribute multiplication in this case ?
Trying to "distribute" multiplication over multiplication would never stop. It is not like distributing multiplication over addition.
If x times yz = xyxz, then why stop there? Wouldn't x distribute again to give xyxxxz? And again to give xyxxxxxxxz? etc. And there should be similar distribution from the right by z. So now we could say that xyxxxxxxxz = xzyzxzxzxzxzxzxzxz, and that could be done again ad infinitum.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint and Lnewqban
  • #5
logicgate said:
TL;DR Summary: Why is it that x times yz equals xyz and not xyxz ?

This might sound like a stupid question but I am just wondering why is it that x times yz equals xyz and not xyxz ? Why don't we distribute multiplication in this case ?
Even if ##y = z = 1##?
 
  • Like
Likes renormalize and phinds
Back
Top