EPTA Simple Math Problem? - Page 14
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
thesideshow
930 Posts
| ||
|
Chux
Peru255 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:39 munchmunch wrote: How did this thread get reopened again? I thought micronesia's post summed it up perfectly. Also, the "What is your education and what is you result?" poll really should have options for, "I didn't vote because I thought it was ambiguous". Pretty Much this. I think we need a context, like for example: a math teacher you know writes that on the board..im pretty sure you will know if its 288 or 2. | ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:40 MasterOfChaos wrote: + Show Spoiler + This one is interesting. Wolfram alpha interprets it as 1/(2*x), binding the omitted multiplication sign stronger to the variable x. But if you insist on left-to-right evaluation you get (1/2)*x Then Wolfram looks at how the / sign works is wrong. One divided by two times x. That's all it is. | ||
|
Kashll
United States1117 Posts
If you're in a context where it's ambiguous then just write it better. | ||
|
bRuTaL!!
Finland588 Posts
| ||
MasterOfChaos
Germany2896 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:43 StarStruck wrote: You just had to re-open this thread. Didn't you? I think for now on, all contests that require you to do a skill testing question in order to win should use this question (not like they don't anyway!). Ha. I didn't (and can't) open a thread. I thought that poll is interesting because I don't think it's a question of skill but a question of convention. And the conventions you're exposed to at school can differ from those you're exposed to at university. | ||
|
Lightningbullet
United States507 Posts
On April 08 2011 05:44 RodrigoX wrote: PEMDAS. Its not their fault... Parentheses exponents multiplication division addition subtraction. 48 divided by 2(9+3) 48 divided by 2(12) 48 divided by 24 2 It kinda is. They didn't go from left to right. And its more like PE(MD)(AD)<-- in the order they occur | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:44 thesideshow wrote: masterofchaos's second poll is pretty good. I think people more used to dealing with algebra view it as 2. Pretty much. It might not be the "way it is supposed to be" but in the classroom this is just the way it has been for the past 9 years for me. | ||
|
meegrean
Thailand7699 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:43 staplestf2 wrote: are people just voting 2 too troll us? Yep, I love voting for the underdog. | ||
|
Unhallowed
Canada171 Posts
I believe this was taught to me in elementary school. | ||
|
YokaY
United States108 Posts
I'd think by using "÷" symbol for division, people would avoid the mistake of putting the (9+3) in the denominator. So people shouldn't be seeing 1/(2*x), since by using ÷ they probably mean it to be read in a line. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
| ||
|
lightrise
United States1355 Posts
| ||
|
Antiochus
Canada548 Posts
| ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
| ||
|
blazingblue16
Canada41 Posts
There, now no one will ever get it wrong. I can't believe there is 12 pages of arguing on how it should be in variations of 48÷(2(9+3)), 48÷2(9+3) or etc. p.s. That is the clearest way of writing that statement. 12x48÷2 = 288 or if you read it as (9+3)48/2 (all over 2) | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:44 JinDesu wrote: Then Wolfram looks at how the / sign works is wrong. One divided by two times x. That's all it is. or walpha works according to real world conventions /rolleyes | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22208 Posts
| ||
|
Marradron
Netherlands1586 Posts
On April 08 2011 06:40 MasterOfChaos wrote: This one is interesting. Wolfram alpha interprets it as 1/(2*x), binding the omitted multiplication sign stronger to the variable x. But if you insist on left-to-right evaluation you get (1/2)*x. wolfram actually vieuws it as 1/2x as (1/2)x http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48/2(9+3) edit: I now see what you mean i tried 1/2x and it does indeed make it 1/(2x). It however makes 1/2(2+9) into (1/2)*(2+9) doesnt seem consistent | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
yeah i know i edited that a while back. typo =) | ||
| ||
