EPTOn April 08 2011 06:10 Hugoboss21 wrote:
![[image loading]](http://i56.tinypic.com/ae4mwx.png)
288 logic.
288 logic.
2 = (1*2) sorry
A Simple Math Problem? - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
MGHova
Canada274 Posts
2 = (1*2) sorry | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:09 GizmoPT wrote: im engineer and its 2 no more discussion kk ;x Division from left to right thus you divide 48 by 2 before you dealing with the parentheses. P in Pemdas doesn't mean to use the parentheses but rather solve whats inside. Plug it into a Scientific Calculator. The automatically follow pemdas. Lol at people who swear its 2. Go back to school son  | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22212 Posts
| ||
|
SageFantasma
United States383 Posts
If you just say the problem out loud, it makes sense: 48/2(9+3)=Fourty-eight divided by two multiplied(or distributed to) by nine plus three. Order of operations tells you to SIMPLIFY what is in parentheses first. Once it is fully simplified(12), you remove the parentheses and multiply by the base. In this case, the base is 48/2, which is 24. As such, you multiply your base, 24, by what was in the parentheses, which is now 12. 24x12=288. Granted it's already explained by lots of people above, hopefully this will help someone who doesn't get it yet, understand. | ||
|
thesideshow
930 Posts
| ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5600 Posts
lol... so much work just to state the obvious | ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:10 Hugoboss21 wrote: 288 logic. Separating 2 into 1*2 requires parenthesiseses (what's the plural?) Why is it so hard to understand that it is 48÷2x12? I don't see a problem looking at that? | ||
|
Ambiplat
Canada5 Posts
On April 08 2011 05:58 Alzadar wrote: This is why nobody uses the ÷ symbol, it's confusing. The true answer is of course 48 % 24 = 0. Lol! It's as my math teacher used to say, there's no such thing as dividing, there's only multiplying by a fraction. | ||
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
|
MajorityofOne
Canada2506 Posts
| ||
|
HaNdFisH
Australia119 Posts
It should be written (in LaTex, or similar): \frac{48}{2(9+3)} or \frac{48}{2}(9+3) The fact that the two is left outside the brackets, but without an explicit multiplication symbol leaves the question as to which one the author meant it to be. Didn't vote either, the question is deliberately misleading. | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
| ||
|
yawnoC
United States3704 Posts
| ||
|
Amarxist
United States371 Posts
| ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22212 Posts
| ||
|
SgtCoDFish
United Kingdom1520 Posts
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48/2(9+3) There is no argument in this question. Anyone saying it's 2 is a troll or has made an honest mistake. | ||
|
garbanzo
United States4046 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:13 Kennigit wrote: The more important question is how many science/cs/engineering majors got this wrong -_-;;;; Dis thread. I would argue that the more math you do the more likely you are going to get this wrong. Entirely because of the fact that nobody who actually does math would ever write an equation in this way. | ||
|
NathanSC
United States620 Posts
On April 08 2011 05:53 Navane wrote: Yeah, as a frequent algebra scribbler i see 48/2(3+9) as:
for that exact reason. If you multiplicate without even using a multiplication sign, its stronger than dividing. a/bcde = a/(bcde), not acde/b This captured everything I wanted to say. From personal experience in many math classes, attaching a parenthesis to something without explicit use of a multiplication symbol joins the two statements together. That, however, isn't algebraically correct. I stand by the reasoning though. | ||
|
MGHova
Canada274 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:13 Kennigit wrote: The more important question is how many science/cs/engineering majors got this wrong -_-;;;; Dis thread. I"m a scientist and I got it right +1 scientists -1 for the oompa loompa's of science (engineers) | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
2, really? T_T | ||
| ||
