48÷2(9+3) = ????
- Thread starter nubian
- Start date
This doesn´t make the case for x(y) > z/x
It seems you are implying that brackets are implied around 2(9+3) because of distributive property. You are treating it as a single term [2(9+3)]. However, that is not the original equation.
Isn't it time for two retards to go to bed?
My point was I input the problem exactly how it is written and the answer came out to be 288.
The videos you idiots are posting did the same thing but got a different answer
.
the reason we keep on asking for sources is that a rule such as the one you all are proposing would be a very important one which means it would be extremely easy to find. Every rule i was taught in third grade shows up pretty easily in google. There is a difference between telling someone to simplify something and specifying the order in which that simplification must occur.
Ive been saying it from the beginning, but these asshats aren't getting it. Its like they think Simplification is some type of myth or some shit. Crazy.
I don´t think that is the case. The people that disagree with you don´t have any problems understanding the semantics of simplication and how it applies to mathematics.
To get a solution of 2, one must assume a single term for [2(9+3)].
Because otherwise, the order of operations is from left to right once you compute inside the parenthesis as the distribution holds the same weight as multiplication in the order of operations because the distributive property is multiplication.
But followup, that is not how the equation is written.
other sites for you to practice your algebraic skills:
http://www.shmoop.com/basic-algebra/funky-equations.html
http://classrooms.tacoma.k12.wa.us/stadium/eschlytter/index.php?section=links
http://books.google.com/books?id=2t...istributing solving equations algebra&f=false
http://www.shmoop.com/basic-algebra/funky-equations.html
http://classrooms.tacoma.k12.wa.us/stadium/eschlytter/index.php?section=links
http://books.google.com/books?id=2t...istributing solving equations algebra&f=false
I was just discussing this issue above.
Isn't it time for two retards to go to bed?
My point was I input the problem exactly how it is written and the answer came out to be 288.
The videos you idiots are posting did the same thing but got a different answer
You can't do that idiot. When you use a calculator you are essentially programming an answer. You have to understand basic math, and the procedures to input the problems before using a calculator. They don't think for you.
nope....by placing those parentheses there, you prioritized what needs to be done...
36÷2(9) is not the same as 36÷2*9
36÷2(9) = 2
36÷2*9 = 162
Isn't it time for two retards to go to bed?
My point was I input the problem exactly how it is written and the answer came out to be 288.
The videos you idiots are posting did the same thing but got a different answer
You and a-hole18 should go to bed then homes..
The problem is written, and waiting to be simplified... Then evaluated. Slow fucks like yourself dont understand the concept and think everyone else is slow... But hey, retards dont know they're retarded.
that example does not prove the claim. the only reason the 2 is immediately multiplied by the sum of (3 + 6) is because there's nothing else there.
http://www.math.com/school/subject2/practice/S2U1L2/S2U1L2Pract.html
This is the problem I just got on math.com 79/48*4= 6.58 was the answer from left to right. 48/2*12= 288
Example 3: Evaluate 9 - 5 ÷ (8 - 3) x 2 + 6 using the order of operations.
Solution: Step 1: 9 - 5 ÷ (8 - 3) x 2 + 6 = 9 - 5 ÷ 5 x 2 + 6 Parentheses
Step 2: 9 - 5 ÷ 5 x 2 + 6 = 9 - 1 x 2 + 6 Division
Step 3: 9 - 1 x 2 + 6 = 9 - 2 + 6 Multiplication
Step 4: 9 - 2 + 6 = 7 + 6 Subtraction
Step 5: 7 + 6 = 13 Addition
http://www.mathgoodies.com/Lessons/vol7/order_operations.html
This is the problem I just got on math.com 79/48*4= 6.58 was the answer from left to right. 48/2*12= 288
Example 3: Evaluate 9 - 5 ÷ (8 - 3) x 2 + 6 using the order of operations.
Solution: Step 1: 9 - 5 ÷ (8 - 3) x 2 + 6 = 9 - 5 ÷ 5 x 2 + 6 Parentheses
Step 2: 9 - 5 ÷ 5 x 2 + 6 = 9 - 1 x 2 + 6 Division
Step 3: 9 - 1 x 2 + 6 = 9 - 2 + 6 Multiplication
Step 4: 9 - 2 + 6 = 7 + 6 Subtraction
Step 5: 7 + 6 = 13 Addition
http://www.mathgoodies.com/Lessons/vol7/order_operations.html
seriously, there is nothing to simplify with the 9.
(9) = 9
2(9) = 2 * 9
so 36 ÷ 2(9) = 36 ÷ 2 * 9
Keep proving my point , Damn you dumb.
That is what I said! hence the videos ppl posted prove nothing.
Wrong. It works that way in all forms. Its called (and I'll say it again) Simplification.
So why does math.com have 1/2(5) =2.5
in the ex
x = 1/2 ($5.00) - $2.00
x = $2.50 - $2.00
x = $0.50 or fifty cents
http://www.math.com/school/subject2/lessons/S2U1L3EX.html
I think the answer is 288 depending on the origin of the question. If was a problem thats not attach to in real life example, then its 2.
Im going to email them right now.
That is a regular occurance on this board (logical fallacies). What he offered as proof was no such thing. As another poster stated, I am still waiting on the rule supporting x(y) > z/x.
Thereare rules in math. Just so that we all come to the same answer for the same equation. This is not like reading where you simply go from left to right. If you look through the links I posted, you will see how simplification works and how you can not solve an algebraic equation until you get rid of ALL parentheses. there is no implication. It's application of mathematical principles.
LOL!!! Both answers can not be correct the way the original equation was written. The answer is 2. And yes, "implied" multiplication as you call it, takes precedence over regular multiplicaiton & division. or simply put: multiplying parentheses by anything (including the number 2) takes priority over regular multiplication...
yes it does...the parentheses takes priority....
so if you had an equation z/x(y) you can rewrite it as z/xy....I am not implying anything. This is how algebra is performed. you distribute across the parentheses until you can get rid of them and then you move on.
You and a-hole18 should go to bed then homes..
The problem is written, and waiting to be simplified... Then evaluated. Slow fucks like yourself dont understand the concept and think everyone else is slow... But hey, retards dont know they're retarded.
That's true so here
All jokes be back on tomorrow to hopefully get to the bottom of it if not fuck it we'll move on.
because the internet does not replace the human mind...
PARENTHESES TAKE PRIORITY OVER EVERYTHING ELSE>
1/2(5) is not the same as 1/2 (5). they obviously have a SEPARATE fraction and the parentheses are not right next to the 2...there is a space there so that you can see the fraction separately....
IT'S A GLITCH IN THE MATRIX!!!
Dam..... The matrix is fucking with my head.
It can be 2 or 288 depending on the intentions
Its more common to write 1/2(4) and get 2 instead of 1/8
i always thought u had to distribute thru parentheses to get rid of them. thats why u do that so you wont get a wrong answers. its understood that a 1 is in front of them unless and an exponent of 1 is behind them otherwise stated. i.e. (9+3) = 1(9+3) too the 1st power. but if ur given something like 2(9+3) squared you have to solve all this 1st before you move on. kinda like whole numbers are understood be be over one when multiplying them by fractions. But I been wrong b4 and this is BGOL no one is ever right. . .
Followup,
The very premise of your argument is implying a single term for [2(9+3)].
Because otherwise, the order of operations is from left to right once you compute inside the parenthesis as the distribution holds the same weight as multiplication in the order of operations because the distributive property is multiplication.
So again, where is the explicit rule for x(y) > z/x. ?
The only way to prove your case is to find a rule in support of the above otherwise you have to go against order of operations to get your solution. Because nowhere does it state you have to first distribute across the data inside the parenthesis. You complete INSIDE of the parenthesis. However, whether you distribute to the parenthesis depends on the order of operations. The multiplication does not over-ride the division to start the equation. That distributive function (multiplication in this case) holds the same weight as the division so you must start from left to right.
If that were the case, you would be able to easily find the specific rule for it.
Your solution is 100 percent correct if you imply [2(9+3)].
Intentions? Really? In any case this equation has to be Simplified and it comes out the same way.
YO!!! This shit is 27 pages
I got 2
I got 2
Similar threads
