48÷2(9+3) = ????

[Rawness]

I think I fucked up, shouldn't it be

((0.0208333333)^-1)/2 ^ 1/(9+3)

????

But, it's the same shit right?

Times like this makes me happy I calculate 3 phase electrical circuits that I can check with a multimeter.

I can't say that it is. To my knowledge, there's no real convention when it comes to fractional exponents, so that could be read as

((0.0208333333)^-1)/2 ^ [1/(9+3)] which, of course would be different

OR

((0.0208333333)^-1)/(2 ^ 1)/(9+3) which would be a different problem.


And neither of those are the problem in the title (as the 2 is divided by (9+3))

 

[mallorquin]

It ends up being a long thread wherever it gets posted. I think the main problem (if the answer is indeed 2) is not handling that "2()" operation before the "48/#" portion. That's how I came up with 288...just doing what I remember of the order of operations but not knowing or at least remembering that one part.
I don't get why people are calling each other stupid over it though, because although it's a "simple" math problem...it obviously isn't that simple... I've done network subnetting, and hex, binary, and for a while at least, wrote some assembly language programs, so I don't think I'm a complete idiot...but I admit, I was in the 288 club, and I think I can say that 2 is the answer now.

The reason we are calling people ignorant is because a few of the folks that believe that the answer is 2 don't fully understand the logic behind the folks who make logical arguments for why they believe it's 2. Case and point, Nathan704 who clearly showed he did not understand the order of operations, or Gods_debris who could not understand why we would add the 9 to the 3 in the parenthesis.
These are the idiots we are talking about, not everyone on the 2's side.

 

[Les W]

Some people are reading it like this

forty eight, divided by two times nine plus three

others are reading

forty eight divided by two, multiplied by nine plus three.

2(9+3) is only ONE TERM


lemme ask you what what is (9+3)20÷48 = ???

 

[Rawness]

you are now changing the equation...
you are creating a new priority that does not exist in the original equation. As I stated earlier, if it was meant to divide the 48 by 2 first the equation would look like this:
48/2(9+3)

As written, we must apply PEMDAS and go from there. There are no 2 ways to read the original equation.

EDIT: meaning the 48/2 would look like a fraction and be smaller than the (9+3). But the way the 2 is typed right next to the parentheses, there is no doubt how it is to be solved. Thanks.

About the only thing your dumbass has correct....too bad you're still reading it incorrectly.

 

[Electric Relaxation]

Don't know why dudes are acting like this hasn't already been posted, but:

from Intermediate Algebra by Ron Larson, Kimberly Nolting​

LINK


Practical Application
48÷2(9+3) =
48÷2(12) = SEE THE GOTDAMN STUDY TIP ABOVE
48÷24 = God bless and good night.

 

[LordSinister]

I can't say that it is. To my knowledge, there's no real convention when it comes to fractional exponents, so that could be read as

((0.0208333333)^-1)/2 ^ [1/(9+3)] which, of course would be different

OR

((0.0208333333)^-1)/(2 ^ 1)/(9+3) which would be a different problem.


And neither of those are the problem in the title (as the 2 is divided by (9+3))

Not divided but reciprocal. Fuck it, the answer is null set...

 

[followup]

I'm going to try this again since the last time it was posted was several pages ago:
a÷b(c+d)=????
PEMDAS-->a÷(bc+bd)

Distribute across the parentheses first, then divide. Another way of thinking about it is that you have 3 separate equations:
1st equation: (c+d)
2nd equation: b * (c+d)
3rd equation: a÷[b(c+d)]

The order of the equations is the way it is because multiply anything in parentheses by ANYTHING ELSE INCLUDING A NUMBER takes priority over MDAS. There is no ambiguity about this. You may enter it into a calculator and get the wrong answer, but you will never get ANY math instructor to agree with it. So, just as your 2nd grade teacher told you: no calculators!!! learn to do the math yourself. Thanks.

 

[Nobody]

2(9+3) is only ONE TERM


lemme ask you what what is (9+3)20÷48 = ???

lol

(9+3)20÷48

Complete the parentheses.

(12)20÷48, or 12*20÷48

Then solve left to right

240÷48 = 5.

What's the big deal?

 

[Louis Koo]

 

[Rawness]

Don't know why dudes are acting like this hasn't already been posted, but:

from Intermediate Algebra by Ron Larson, Kimberly Nolting​

LINK


Practical Application
48÷2(9+3) =
48÷2(12) = SEE THE GOTDAMN STUDY TIP ABOVE
48÷24 = God bless and good night.

'da fuck is that a GED training book?

 

[followup]

Don't know why dudes are acting like this hasn't already been posted, but:

from Intermediate Algebra by Ron Larson, Kimberly Nolting​

LINK


Practical Application
48÷2(9+3) =
48÷2(12) = SEE THE GOTDAMN STUDY TIP ABOVE
48÷24 = God bless and good night.

posted multiple times, in many different ways, but in order to feel like their answer MAY be correct, people are ignoring it...even some of the examples the 288ers posted refute what they are claiming, but they still argue. It's ok. I am giving out FREE math lessons until I finish watching my shows.

 

[mallorquin]

Don't know why dudes are acting like this hasn't already been posted, but:

from Intermediate Algebra by Ron Larson, Kimberly Nolting​

LINK


Practical Application
48÷2(9+3) =
48÷2(12) = SEE THE GOTDAMN STUDY TIP ABOVE
48÷24 = God bless and good night.

Thank you, and the irony of it is, these niggas don't understand the logic behind something that supports their argument. God_Dumbass and Nate, and every other person who said this ÷ was different from this /.

 

[Duval's King]

It ends up being a long thread wherever it gets posted. I think the main problem (if the answer is indeed 2) is not handling that "2()" operation before the "48/#" portion. That's how I came up with 288...just doing what I remember of the order of operations but not knowing or at least remembering that one part.
I don't get why people are calling each other stupid over it though, because although it's a "simple" math problem...it obviously isn't that simple... I've done network subnetting, and hex, binary, and for a while at least, wrote some assembly language programs, so I don't think I'm a complete idiot...but I admit, I was in the 288 club, and I think I can say that 2 is the answer now.

No u were right i was wrong It should be displayed as follows; 48÷2×(9+3) at first glance at least for me i saw it as; 48÷(2(9+3) but after i actually paid attention i saw the correct way..

 

[wiZe]

I'm in fuckin' tears.

 

[followup]

lol

(9+3)20÷48

Complete the parentheses.

(12)20÷48, or 12*20÷48

Then solve left to right

240÷48 = 5.

What's the big deal?

[/end thread]
Checkmate to Les W

 

[Rawness]

2(9+3) is only ONE TERM


lemme ask you what what is (9+3)20÷48 = ???

lol

(9+3)20÷48

Complete the parentheses.

(12)20÷48, or 12*20÷48

Then solve left to right

240÷48 = 5.

What's the big deal?

All this proves is that some of us ALWAYS solve left to right when we reach that level of PEMDAS, and others do it when they feel like it.

But I'm done for the night, hopefully you idiots are around to entertain me through work tomorrow.

 

[Costanza]

Never thought I'd see the day...

 

[followup]

props to eletrik relaxation:

 

[Nobody]

All this proves is that some of us ALWAYS solve left to right when we reach that level of PEMDAS, and others do it when they feel like it.

But I'm done for the night, hopefully you idiots are around to entertain me through work tomorrow.

Yep.

I don't get how followup thinks that my post proves her right.

Also I cannot find anything else that states implied multiplication takes precedence over anything else.

Implied multiplication is just a manner of writing an equation.

For instance

2*x = 2x. The 2x is implied multiplication. Writing 2*x as 2x doesn't suddenly make it get more precedence over anything else.

When you start fucking around like that with math, you start fucking around with the core values of mathematics and disrupt everything from that point on.

You have to be very careful with that.

2(9+3) is implied multiplication.

but that's also 2*(9+3) or 2*12

Suddenly it's no longer implied, but explicit.

2(12)

Oh noes, it's implied again, and therefore more powerful!

Fuck out of here with that shit.

 

[Louis Koo]

 

[Nobody]

lol dude, you're killing me with that shit.

What's crazy is, you probably could fuck someone up financially with math like that.

 

[mallorquin]

All I know is I have never come in to situation where I have gotten a problem like this wrong. We have sources on both sides of the fence. Some who say go left to right for equal priority, some who say multiplication, implied by parenthesis has higher priority. I can't call anyone a dumb-ass if they were taught the latter. The only dumb-asses were the folks that ocked themselves by exposing their ignorance of the broader subject.

The problem, I now see, is written ambiguously leaving folks on both sides of the fence. As someone who spends a lot of time coding, there is no way I see the answer as 2.

And there is no way I would believe some math.com website was more accurate than mathcad, mathematica, which scientist and engineers rely heavily upon to crunch numbers. If I had to hard code and expression like this to get some kind of result, I would need to see it written down in fractional form.

Nor would I believe that a 25 dollar calculator was more capable than my 89 Titanium, that can do integration.

So the folks that think it's 2, that had a logical explanation for why they came to that conclusion, we agree to disagree. It really doesn't matter, we never see problems written this way anyway.

But as I have said before, I refuse to debate with someone who obviously does not understand the order of operations. I will make fun of you but we really won't be debating.

 

[followup]

lol dude, you're killing me with that shit.

What's crazy is, you probably could fuck someone up financially with math like that.

oh, but he IS (assuming he is not lying about his profession)
Luckily, he does not have to deal with this type of math, IF he is not lying about his profession

 

[tre2k4]

props to eletrik relaxation:

Props to me because I posted the image above first. Along with theses that you decide not to post

These examples show were Division comes before Multiplying despite the () still being there
Kaplan PRAXIS 2009 Edition

A professor at Bloomfield College

[/QUOTE]

 

[Louis Koo]

oh, but he IS (assuming he is not lying about his profession)
Luckily, he does not have to deal with this type of math, IF he is not lying about his profession

Go read the Lola finance threads. See if someone NOT in the industry could lie about it.

 

[followup]

Nor would I believe that a 25 dollar calculator was more capable than my 89 Titanium, that can do integration.

This statement is part of the reason why 40% of responders get this problem incorrect. You are relying on the power of a machine to do your thinking for you. If the user does not know how to use the machine, the machine is worthless, no matter how much the user paid for it.

 

[followup]

Props to me because I posted the image above first. Along with theses that you decide not to post

These examples show were Division comes before Multiplying despite the () still being there
Kaplan PRAXIS 2009 Edition

A professor at Bloomfield College

as usual, most of your examples do not compare to the operations happening in the original equation. That is the mistake that you keep making. Secondly, the example from a professor at Bloomfield is incorrect. I had stopped responding to your 'examples' because for the most part you are comparing apples & rocks

 

[wiZe]

This statement is part of the reason why 40% of responders get this problem incorrect. You are relying on the power of a machine to do your thinking for you. If the user does not know how to use the machine, the machine is worthless, no matter how much the user paid for it.

 

[mallorquin]

Props to me because I posted the image above first. Along with theses that you decide not to post

These examples show were Division comes before Multiplying despite the () still being there
Kaplan PRAXIS 2009 Edition

A professor at Bloomfield College

[/QUOTE]

Thanks again! You know we have some real cliffs notes muthafuckers in this thread. A lot of these fools are learning math the first time.

 

[followup]

-10÷2(5)=? (you must perform the function involving the parentheses first)
-10÷10=?
--> -1

 

[Nobody]

-10÷2(5)=? (you must perform the function involving the parentheses first)
-10÷10=?
--> -1

Incorrect.

There is nothing to perform within the parentheses.

Your equation is essentially -10÷2*5 = -25

 

[followup]

LMAO!!! Love that clip.
Slap me all you want, but you still won't get this problem correct:
48÷2(9+3) = ????

 

[Nobody]

Yep.

I don't get how followup thinks that my post proves her right.

Also I cannot find anything else that states implied multiplication takes precedence over anything else.

Implied multiplication is just a manner of writing an equation.

For instance

2*x = 2x. The 2x is implied multiplication. Writing 2*x as 2x doesn't suddenly make it get more precedence over anything else.

When you start fucking around like that with math, you start fucking around with the core values of mathematics and disrupt everything from that point on.

You have to be very careful with that.

2(9+3) is implied multiplication.

but that's also 2*(9+3) or 2*12

Suddenly it's no longer implied, but explicit.

2(12)

Oh noes, it's implied again, and therefore more powerful!

Fuck out of here with that shit.

Stop cherry picking posts Followup.

 

[Louis Koo]

I watched that at least 10 times before so I thought I'd watch it again for fun. I was eating my Reese's Pieces and the end caught me off guard (because that was never part of the original video) and I damn near choked.

 

[Nobody]

Explain to me how writing 2*x as 2x gives it more priority.