|
On April 08 2011 10:28 Slithe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:26 MajorityofOne wrote:On April 08 2011 10:21 Slithe wrote:
This thread seriously needs to be stopped. The arguments are just going in cycles. Not curious to see at what point it runs out of steam? I'm thinking 100+ pages Just a tad curious, perhaps we should have a pool going to guess the page count.
I'd see it being closed instead of running out of steam. I've checked the thread periodically throughout the day whenever I came onto TL and it's been the same thing every time. Majority of the posts are people who didn't read previous responses or didn't think it through fully/refer to PEMDAS as law when it's really just a learning tool.
|
On April 08 2011 10:28 Slithe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:26 MajorityofOne wrote:On April 08 2011 10:21 Slithe wrote:
This thread seriously needs to be stopped. The arguments are just going in cycles. Not curious to see at what point it runs out of steam? I'm thinking 100+ pages Just a tad curious, perhaps we should have a pool going to guess the page count.
100 or 10(10) or 10^2 pages?
Wait a minute...
10^2 = 1*(0^2) = 1*0 = 0
10^2 = 0 obviously
edit:
+ Show Spoiler + clearly ambiguous 
|
On April 08 2011 10:27 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:25 VALERO wrote:
i've never been more confused in my life
people are not only picking wrong answers to a fifth grade math problem, they're also trying to argue that it's "ambiguous" and that their retard interpretation is right too If you write a problem well then it's clear to see what the right answer is. Even people who got 288 probably second-guessed themselves.
the only second guessing i did was determining if this was a real thread and not some elaborate joke
|
On April 08 2011 10:27 latan wrote:
I have two degrees in mathematics and i chose 2. because there's no * sign, juxtaposition pretty much means parenthesis in most contexts. afaik there's no universally correct or agreed upon order for these things, so the question is ambiguous, but if something like that were written in a book the answer would be 2 most of the time.
anyway what's the point of the poll?
Tell that to practically every grade school textbook. Frigging a.
On April 08 2011 10:23 Eogris wrote:
what we really need is day9's input on the matter.
Why ask him? He would tell you the answer is [J].
|
On April 08 2011 05:38 kainzero wrote:
ya'll gotta remember your mnemonics
please excuse my dear arnold schwarzenegger
well im sure in the last 30 pages somebody has said this, but that sir is a fail
|
how does it feel that those of you who picked 2 would fail a 3rd grade test...
User was warned for this post
|
Basically, shit like this is why people hate math. If teachers tried to make math fun instead of throwing retarded trick questions at students then maybe I'd get reactions other than "oh, I hated/failed math" when I tell people I'm majoring in math.
|
On April 08 2011 10:32 VALERO wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:27 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 10:25 VALERO wrote:
i've never been more confused in my life
people are not only picking wrong answers to a fifth grade math problem, they're also trying to argue that it's "ambiguous" and that their retard interpretation is right too If you write a problem well then it's clear to see what the right answer is. Even people who got 288 probably second-guessed themselves. the only second guessing i did was determining if this was a real thread and not some elaborate joke
Likewise ^_^
To be honest, it's an unfair question to ask somebody if they second-guessed themselves, since you will never just definitively have an answer to something after only thinking about it once. I always "check my work" in case a make a mistake, which I hardly can consider second-guessing at the same level as "Oh wait, but it might actually be...".
|
On April 08 2011 10:33 sicarii wrote:
how does it feel that those of you who picked 2 would fail a 3rd grade test...
Yeah, because 3rd graders know exactly what pemdas is.
Its order of operations... Like its a big deal if you mixed it up. Get over yourselves.
|
On April 08 2011 10:33 sicarii wrote:
how does it feel that those of you who picked 2 would fail a 3rd grade test...
Looooooooool. Your post is even funnier given the ridiculous number of pages of people trying to justify their wrong answers.
|
On April 08 2011 10:35 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:32 VALERO wrote:On April 08 2011 10:27 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 10:25 VALERO wrote:
i've never been more confused in my life
people are not only picking wrong answers to a fifth grade math problem, they're also trying to argue that it's "ambiguous" and that their retard interpretation is right too If you write a problem well then it's clear to see what the right answer is. Even people who got 288 probably second-guessed themselves. the only second guessing i did was determining if this was a real thread and not some elaborate joke Likewise ^_^ To be honest, it's an unfair question to ask somebody if they second-guessed themselves, since you will never just definitively have an answer to something after only thinking about it once. I always "check my work" in case a make a mistake, which I hardly can consider second-guessing at the same level as "Oh wait, but it might actually be...".
If you write (48/2)(9+3) you shouldn't have to check your work even. There's literally no room to make a mistake. Of course, you don't get 40 page threads either, but since no one seems to be happy about this thread that might be a good thing.
|
On April 08 2011 10:34 jalstar wrote:
Basically, shit like this is why people hate math. If teachers tried to make math fun instead of throwing retarded trick questions at students then maybe I'd get reactions other than "oh, I hated/failed math" when I tell people I'm majoring in math.
it's not a trick question
|
On April 08 2011 10:37 VALERO wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:34 jalstar wrote:
Basically, shit like this is why people hate math. If teachers tried to make math fun instead of throwing retarded trick questions at students then maybe I'd get reactions other than "oh, I hated/failed math" when I tell people I'm majoring in math. it's not a trick question
Yes it is, how is something that fucks with your instincts not a trick question? It's not a particularly hard trick question, especially when it's multiple choice, but it's still a trick.
|
Its a pretty pointless question thats just meant to see how many people could make a simple, really pretty understandable mistake, not actually test math skills or anything...
|
Hahaha, I voted 2 and I study fking math -.-. So embarrased :S.
|
On April 08 2011 10:21 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:18 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 10:16 mahnini wrote:On April 08 2011 10:14 Severedevil wrote:On April 08 2011 10:10 mahnini wrote:On April 08 2011 10:02 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 09:54 munchmunch wrote:On April 08 2011 09:22 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 09:03 munchmunch wrote:On April 08 2011 08:59 Zeke50100 wrote:
[quote]
I don't get how "these two things are exactly the same" do not equate to "these two things are interchangeable, and therefore one is no more ambiguous than the other" in your mind. LOL, I read that and thought "What a good post, well said!" Then I reread it and realized you were saying the exact opposite of what I thought. I guess a Zeke50100 is an anti-munchmunch. And to jump into that conversation, "the same" on a semantic level is not the same as being "the same" on a syntactic level. Syntax doesn't mean a thing when it comes to ambiguity because it should be understood that both are simplified to the same level. You're suggesting that "2+1-1" would be more correct than "2-1+1" because it's syntactically more "natural" to somebody's own perception, which is what garbanzo is trying to say. Of course syntax means something when it comes to ambiguity. People who write programming language specifications have to think about syntactic ambiguity all the time. And syntactic ambiguity is by definition the ambiguities that occur before or in the process of simplification. The fact that neither "2+1-1" and "2-1+1" are neither syntactically or semantically ambiguous to most people has nothing to do with it. I agree that one is more natural than the other, but in my mind this is a third concept distinct from ambiguity or correctness (which are themselves very distinct). Anyway, I have to quit the thread now. Nice talking to you... quite fun when I'm procrastinating to meet somebody who can write well but thinks exactly the opposite to myself. Funny you should mention that, since I should probably do some work myself  It's easily possible that somebody finds 2+1-1 more ambiguous to 2-1+1, which is something along the lines of what I was trying to say; however, that doesn't make one of them more ambiguous in the grand scheme of things (both being expressions of equal length and all). Anyway, with those of you saying that it would be correct in an informal setting, the problem is that this is on the internet, where an "informal" (which you should really call oral or face-to-face communication via speaking) setting is impossible in the same way sending sarcasm through text without tone is impossible. When typing, we have to assume robotic rule-following, rather than what would "normally" occur when two people communicate. Also, the reason certain languages do not accept parentheses as a function in itself is not a flaw in math, but a flaw in the language itself ^_^ this a million times. this is what i was trying to get at with my you're vs your example (maybe not the best example anyway). in an "informal" situation you understand through context but this situation gives none and therefore you should default to accepted standards. maybe there are some set of rules in upper mathematics that trumps order of operations that i don't know, though no one has brought it up. 48/2(9+3) has no multiplication operator. In algebra, multiplication involving variables is often written as a juxtaposition (e.g. xy for x times y or 5x for five times x). This notation can also be used for quantities that are surrounded by parentheses (e.g. 5(2) or (5)(2) for five times two). wiki says there is Right, but people's first instinct is to multiply by the thing immediately to the left, which is 2. If I were writing this problem as part of a formal proof I would put (48/2)(9+3) without a second thought. i agree, but because it is easily misinterpreted doesn't make it necessarily wrong. Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:19 Snipinpanda wrote:On April 08 2011 10:16 mahnini wrote:On April 08 2011 10:14 Severedevil wrote:On April 08 2011 10:10 mahnini wrote:On April 08 2011 10:02 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 09:54 munchmunch wrote:On April 08 2011 09:22 Zeke50100 wrote:On April 08 2011 09:03 munchmunch wrote:On April 08 2011 08:59 Zeke50100 wrote:
[quote]
I don't get how "these two things are exactly the same" do not equate to "these two things are interchangeable, and therefore one is no more ambiguous than the other" in your mind. LOL, I read that and thought "What a good post, well said!" Then I reread it and realized you were saying the exact opposite of what I thought. I guess a Zeke50100 is an anti-munchmunch. And to jump into that conversation, "the same" on a semantic level is not the same as being "the same" on a syntactic level. Syntax doesn't mean a thing when it comes to ambiguity because it should be understood that both are simplified to the same level. You're suggesting that "2+1-1" would be more correct than "2-1+1" because it's syntactically more "natural" to somebody's own perception, which is what garbanzo is trying to say. Of course syntax means something when it comes to ambiguity. People who write programming language specifications have to think about syntactic ambiguity all the time. And syntactic ambiguity is by definition the ambiguities that occur before or in the process of simplification. The fact that neither "2+1-1" and "2-1+1" are neither syntactically or semantically ambiguous to most people has nothing to do with it. I agree that one is more natural than the other, but in my mind this is a third concept distinct from ambiguity or correctness (which are themselves very distinct). Anyway, I have to quit the thread now. Nice talking to you... quite fun when I'm procrastinating to meet somebody who can write well but thinks exactly the opposite to myself. Funny you should mention that, since I should probably do some work myself It's easily possible that somebody finds 2+1-1 more ambiguous to 2-1+1, which is something along the lines of what I was trying to say; however, that doesn't make one of them more ambiguous in the grand scheme of things (both being expressions of equal length and all). Anyway, with those of you saying that it would be correct in an informal setting, the problem is that this is on the internet, where an "informal" (which you should really call oral or face-to-face communication via speaking) setting is impossible in the same way sending sarcasm through text without tone is impossible. When typing, we have to assume robotic rule-following, rather than what would "normally" occur when two people communicate. Also, the reason certain languages do not accept parentheses as a function in itself is not a flaw in math, but a flaw in the language itself ^_^ this a million times. this is what i was trying to get at with my you're vs your example (maybe not the best example anyway). in an "informal" situation you understand through context but this situation gives none and therefore you should default to accepted standards. maybe there are some set of rules in upper mathematics that trumps order of operations that i don't know, though no one has brought it up. 48/2(9+3) has no multiplication operator. In algebra, multiplication involving variables is often written as a juxtaposition (e.g. xy for x times y or 5x for five times x). This notation can also be used for quantities that are surrounded by parentheses (e.g. 5(2) or (5)(2) for five times two). wiki says there is Is doing something often defining it? what?
My point is that you use juxtaposition in place of multiplication "often". You still have yet to define what juxtaposition means in basic algebraic notation. So it depends on the notation that you have to agree upon.
|
On April 08 2011 10:38 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:37 VALERO wrote:On April 08 2011 10:34 jalstar wrote:
Basically, shit like this is why people hate math. If teachers tried to make math fun instead of throwing retarded trick questions at students then maybe I'd get reactions other than "oh, I hated/failed math" when I tell people I'm majoring in math. it's not a trick question Yes it is, how is something that fucks with your instincts not a trick question?
are still fooled by the penny-in-your-ear magic trick, too?
User was banned for this post.
|
On April 08 2011 10:33 sicarii wrote:
how does it feel that those of you who picked 2 would fail a 3rd grade test...
On April 08 2011 10:34 jalstar wrote:
Basically, shit like this is why people hate math. If teachers tried to make math fun instead of throwing retarded trick questions at students then maybe I'd get reactions other than "oh, I hated/failed math" when I tell people I'm majoring in math.
To be honest, before these guys learned about matrices, algebra, finite, calc, etc. I'm pretty sure they would answer 288.
You can cry ambiguity all you want, but when you were taught about the order of operations and given such a question from a textbook, you would put little thought into it and I'm willing to bet all of you would have got it right back then.
Imagine you have a kid and they ask for help with their math homework and the textbook gives them a similar question. Note: the exercise is on order of operations. Would you really confront the teacher if your kid got it wrong because you told them otherwise?
Keep it simple. Don't overextend it.
|
On April 08 2011 10:39 VALERO wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:38 jalstar wrote:On April 08 2011 10:37 VALERO wrote:On April 08 2011 10:34 jalstar wrote:
Basically, shit like this is why people hate math. If teachers tried to make math fun instead of throwing retarded trick questions at students then maybe I'd get reactions other than "oh, I hated/failed math" when I tell people I'm majoring in math. it's not a trick question Yes it is, how is something that fucks with your instincts not a trick question? are still fooled by the penny-in-your-ear magic trick, too?
I wasn't fooled by this, so your question makes no sense. Just because I'm not fooled by it doesn't mean it's not a trick.
You're a troll anyway.
|
First one 288 easily for me.
The way I see 1/2x:
1/2x = 1 / 2 * x
PEDMAS says multiplication and division are the same priority, so left to right 1 / 2 * x = ( 1 / 2 ) * x
CS Major, Math Minor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
