I take it you failed all forms of algebra then.Jay wrote:
no there isn't. The implied function is still a function whether the * sign is present or not.DrunkFace wrote:
Not really because multiplication and division are of the same level and are worked out in order or appearance. But as I've said that does not apply in this scenario because there is only 1 operation.Jay wrote:
Well, that does explain the 2 vs 288 conundrum...
Poll
48÷2(9+3) = ??
| 288 | 43% | 43% - 40 | ||||
| 2 | 56% | 56% - 51 | ||||
| Total: 91 | ||||||
I learned BODMAS, Brackets, exponents, mlitiplaction, addition, subtraction.Trotskygrad wrote:
this is all about order of operations (sounds like a military term iknorite) and PEMDAS (parentheses exponents multiplication division addition subtraction)
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
exponents starts with an O does it?
you're a fucking moron if you don't realize that this has to do with a simple difference in how math is taught in the US vs. the UK and such.DrunkFace wrote:
I take it you failed all forms of algebra then.Jay wrote:
no there isn't. The implied function is still a function whether the * sign is present or not.DrunkFace wrote:
Not really because multiplication and division are of the same level and are worked out in order or appearance. But as I've said that does not apply in this scenario because there is only 1 operation.
thisWinston_Churchill wrote:
Brackets
Exponents
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
Therefore its 2. It is pretty poor notation though.
What if you put in x for (9+3) so that it was 48/2x. Would you still decide to switch it to 48x/2?
So there is no correct answer? Math is just subjective?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
you're a fucking moron if you don't realize that this has to do with a simple difference in how math is taught in the US vs. the UK and such.DrunkFace wrote:
I take it you failed all forms of algebra then.Jay wrote:
no there isn't. The implied function is still a function whether the * sign is present or not.
I know fucking karate
Gooners wrote:
not thisWinston_Churchill wrote:
Brackets
Exponents
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
Therefore its 2. It is pretty poor notation though.
What if you put in x for (9+3) so that it was 48/2x. Would you still decide to switch it to 48x/2?
If you wanna get philosophical about it, I guess it is. If you took that question to many schools in the US, you'd get 288. If you took it to many schools in the UK, I'm guessing you'd get 2. All because of a difference in how order of operations is taught.justice wrote:
So there is no correct answer? Math is just subjective?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
you're a fucking moron if you don't realize that this has to do with a simple difference in how math is taught in the US vs. the UK and such.DrunkFace wrote:
I take it you failed all forms of algebra then.
In glorious Canada, we learn that (Division + Multiplication) and (Addition + Subtraction) are both left sensitive.
do ho ho aren't you clever.Spamtheban wrote:
exponents starts with an O does it?
it seems that it's all to do with bodmas or pemdas.
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
48/2(9+3)
48/2(12)
Once you get to this point, you just go from left to right because division and multiplication are on the same level, even with PEMDAS they say if you have multiplication and division, you just do which ever comes first. The parenthases no longer hold any ground because you've already done all you can do inside them.
So --
48/2 = 24
24(12) = 288
48/2(12)
Once you get to this point, you just go from left to right because division and multiplication are on the same level, even with PEMDAS they say if you have multiplication and division, you just do which ever comes first. The parenthases no longer hold any ground because you've already done all you can do inside them.
So --
48/2 = 24
24(12) = 288
No, it's all to do with the US's use of superfluous parenthesis.
yeah man, just like art. no absolutes.justice wrote:
So there is no correct answer? Math is just subjective?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
you're a fucking moron if you don't realize that this has to do with a simple difference in how math is taught in the US vs. the UK and such.DrunkFace wrote:
I take it you failed all forms of algebra then.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
and i thought math was something the world actually agreed on . .
The problem lies in how it's written because who the fuck uses that division symbol except when you're learning it in 3rd grade?
Clearly the type of division symbol is the underlying problem here.
48 48*(9+3) 576
-- * (9+3) = ----------- = --------- = 288
2 2 2
doing integral calculus for the past week, these basics define whether the answer is right or terrifyingly wrong.
-- * (9+3) = ----------- = --------- = 288
2 2 2
doing integral calculus for the past week, these basics define whether the answer is right or terrifyingly wrong.
yeahiceman785 wrote:
48/2(9+3)
48/2(12)
Once you get to this point, you just go from left to right because division and multiplication are on the same level, even with PEMDAS they say if you have multiplication and division, you just do which ever comes first. The parenthases no longer hold any ground because you've already done all you can do inside them.
So --
48/2 = 24
24(12) = 288
could be. "48 divided by all of this: two times (nine plus three)" is way different than "48 divided by two, then multiplied by (nine plus three)"iceman785 wrote:
Clearly the type of division symbol is the underlying problem here.
288
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Order of operations
My calculator does not lie:
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Order of operations
My calculator does not lie:
48BALTINS wrote:
48 48*(9+3) 576
-- * (9+3) = ----------- = --------- = 288
2 2 2
doing integral calculus for the past week, these basics define whether the answer is right or terrifyingly wrong.
---------- = 2
2(9+3)
On my calculator...
48/2*(9+3) = 288 (as you'd expect)
48/2(9+3) = 2 (as you'd expect)
Last edited by DrunkFace (2011-04-08 15:14:13)
yesDrunkFace wrote:
48BALTINS wrote:
48 48*(9+3) 576
-- * (9+3) = ----------- = --------- = 288
2 2 2
doing integral calculus for the past week, these basics define whether the answer is right or terrifyingly wrong.
---------- = 2
2(9+3)
48/(2(9+3)) = 2
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
It is, because that's what makes it vague. If you use the normal fractional method you would definitively know if 48/2x(9+3) or 48/[2(9+3)] is meanticeman785 wrote:
Clearly the type of division symbol is the underlying problem here.
2