EPTA Simple Math Problem? - Page 23
| Forum Index > General Forum |
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
| ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
Also... ( ) = Parentheses, [ ] = brackets, l2american Also, also... Am I the only one who gets annoyed when 10 people reference a thread (ie. "the body builder thread") and then never actually link to it, so you search for 5 minutes for every variation of "bodybuilder" or even related terms hoping in vain to actually find it? | ||
micronesia
United States24750 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:36 Zeke50100 wrote: I always learned that the P in PEMDAS means inside the parentheses, and nothing beyond that (and a quick google search confirms). I'm glad I'm learning math the right way ^_^ By the way, 1/2x has absolutely no ambiguity. It's definitely x/2; the 1/(2x) is a misconception, and 1/2x should actually never be written as a substitute for it. It's acceptable to write 1/(2x) with 1 above BOTH the 2 AND the X below the line, but not 1/2x. It literally means "1 divided by 2 times x". The words "the quantity" are so underused in life XD So all those college professors who write 1/2x to mean 1/(2x) are wrong? The answer is, technically, yes. But the fact that they all do it means you can't just write it off as not worth considering. | ||
|
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:34 thesideshow wrote: That's assuming 48 * (9+3) 2 Or you can assume 48 2(9+3) The more I think about it the more it's just really poor formatting. I do agree the formatting leaves it a bit ambiguous, but I don't really see a reason to assume the second way when the proper thing to do is read it left to right. | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:34 thesideshow wrote: That's assuming 48 * (9+3) 2 Or you can assume 48 2(9+3) The more I think about it the more it's just really poor formatting. Yeah... I have not truly seen the "÷" symbol used in years. That was for extremely low level math like 10÷2 = 5 Once I hit middle school, a problem like "48÷2(9+3)" was always written 48 2(9+3) I dunno though, interesting thread =| | ||
|
GizmoPT
Portugal3040 Posts
| ||
|
micronesia
United States24750 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:37 jdseemoreglass wrote: I'm gonna vote 2 just to spite all the people telling me the answer is 288 and I'm dumb for not knowing that. Also... ( ) = Parentheses, [ ] = brackets, l2american Also, also... Am I the only one who gets annoyed when 10 people reference a thread (ie. "the body builder thread") and then never actually link to it, so you search for 5 minutes for every variation of "bodybuilder" or even related terms hoping in vain to actually find it? That's not their fault... the url was removed from the OP since it did not relate to the aspects of the original thread that were going to allow it to remain open. Maybe pm someone who said they read it for the url :p | ||
|
Black Gun
Germany4482 Posts
voted 288, with university background. i also voted for 1/2x = 1/(2x), but once again, the notation is faulty so i have to guess what is meant. from my experience, the majority of people who write 1/2x mean that one, but in fact in most encounters with this kind of sloppy notation, i can easily deduce what they meant form the context. | ||
|
Clonze
Canada281 Posts
48÷2(9+3)= a)......48 ............... b) ..... 48 ------------------ = 2 ......... --------------- (12) = 288 ........2(9+3) .................... 2 b) is correct because when it says 48÷2, it cannot include the multiplication of 2 and (9+3) unless they are in brackets like this: (2(9+3)) or unless its 48 over everything like in option a). b) is the correct answer! It makes me laugh that people are arguing that it's a). | ||
|
Ruyguy
Canada988 Posts
| ||
|
munchmunch
Canada789 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:37 AdunToridas wrote: A problem which made me go absolutely crazy is this: Solve for x. Oh man, the bane of my existence for a week a very long time ago. Thank goodness I now know about the Lagrange inversion formula (and the Lambert W function). | ||
|
GizmoPT
Portugal3040 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:40 Clonze wrote: LOL. Why are people arguing over this? 48÷2(9+3)= a) 48 b) 48 ------------------ = 2 --------------- (12) = 288 2(9+3) 2 b) is correct because when it says 48÷2, it cannot include the multiplication of 2 and (9+3) unless they are in brackets like this: (2(9+3)) or unless its 48 over everything like in option a). b) is the correct answer! It makes me laugh that people are arguing that it's a). by that way you should say it should be (48÷2)*(9+3) | ||
|
StallingHard
144 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:40 Clonze wrote: LOL. Why are people arguing over this? 48÷2(9+3)= a)......48 ............... b) ..... 48 ------------------ = 2 --------------- (12) = 288 2(9+3) ............................. 2 b) is correct because when it says 48÷2, it cannot include the multiplication of 2 and (9+3) unless they are in brackets like this: (2(9+3)) or unless its 48 over everything like in option a). b) is the correct answer! It makes me laugh that people are arguing that it's a). It makes me laugh that you come in without considering other arguments, such as poor formating and general usage by those within the academic community. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
Also, { are braces! My teachers always call it squiggly brackets (wtflol). | ||
|
micronesia
United States24750 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:40 Clonze wrote: LOL. Why are people arguing over this? 48÷2(9+3)= a)......48 ............... b) ..... 48 ------------------ = 2 --------------- (12) = 288 2(9+3) ............................. 2 b) is correct because when it says 48÷2, it cannot include the multiplication of 2 and (9+3) unless they are in brackets like this: (2(9+3)) or unless its 48 over everything like in option a). b) is the correct answer! It makes me laugh that people are arguing that it's a). It makes me laugh that you haven't read the thread enough to realize that there are legitimate reasons why people feel like the question can be considered ambiguous. Yes, we know the correct answer according to strict rules of order of operations that we learn in grade school is 288. That's not what people are discussing. Think before you post. | ||
|
de1irium
United States121 Posts
| ||
|
Clonze
Canada281 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:43 StallingHard wrote: It makes me laugh that you come in without considering other arguments, such as poor formating and general usage by those within the academic community. i'm not a forum expert, nor a math expert which is why it's funny^_^ | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:37 micronesia wrote: So all those college professors who write 1/2x to mean 1/(2x) are wrong? The answer is, technically, yes. But the fact that they all do it means you can't just write it off as not worth considering. Most of the ones I know actually have a larger, more enveloping line that includes both the 2 and the X underneath the length of the line when using a diagonal. Normally, you WOULD be able to tell if they mean 1/2x or 1/(2x), because of the work involved in solving the problem as a whole. If you just look at it in an isolated situation, you should pretty much always assume it's 1/2x. The only reason people get confused in the first place is because calculators and computers generally display everything in a single line and do not support true fraction notation often. In general, what you calculator tells you is correct, and if you think it's something different, you screwed up your parentheses  Basically, there is a right and a wrong when it comes to proper mathematical form, and any perceived ambiguity is a result of generations of laziness and/or misconceptions. Context is the first thing you should look at, though, because that will give you a definite answer to what the person really means (really, don't be sloppy when writing math on computers, and don't use the same notation for things that shouldn't share the notation when hand-writing things ) | ||
|
FrozenPanDA
Canada17 Posts
let 48 = 1 (9+3) = x 1/(2*x) which is interpreted by 72% of TL... and most of you are saying it is 288? If you do it the way apparently 72% of TL does it. you end up with 2. If you do it the way 28% of TL does it, you end up with 288. It is honestly how you interpret it. This is only an 'amazing' question because it does not give enough information, if it were (48)/(2(9+3)) it would be simple. Obviously OP left those out to see the responses, the polls, and how the internet behaves.. | ||
|
RoyalCheese
Czech Republic745 Posts
On April 08 2011 07:44 de1irium wrote: http://xkcd.com/169/ Love you. Sincierly, RoyalCheese | ||
| ||
