|
On April 09 2011 00:31 trainRiderJ wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2011 00:29 Insanious wrote:On April 09 2011 00:27 hiddink wrote:![[image loading]](http://i54.tinypic.com/25ji8wi.png) perl wins Um... you changed the notation, you added in the multiplication symbol into the equation because 48/2*(9+3) is very different than 48÷2(9+3) Actually no, those two statements are equivalent. An implied multiplication operation has no higher or lower priority than an explicit one.
Not necessarily. Multiplication by juxtaposition is considered stronger not just by many people in this thread, but also by many different graphing calculators and respected mathematicians.
Maybe the graphing calculators just don't know how to do third grade math, though.
|
On April 09 2011 00:27 hiddink wrote:perl wins
You do realise that you have made an interpretation of the original problem when typing that right? The question requires interpretation and it'll come down to what school of thought you belong to wheter or not you'll get 288 or 2....
|
On April 09 2011 00:32 Wonderballs wrote:as with many other inconsistencies with the problem, the computer has no idea how to interpret the parenthesis if there is no operator between it and the previous term. It's a matter of programming logic than actual algebra. MATLAB OUTPUT >> 48/2(9+3) ??? 48/2(9+3) | Error: Unbalanced or unexpected parenthesis or bracket.
The implied multiplication of n(x+y) style expressions doesn't go over well with compilers its true but adding in the '*' operator is legitimate and doesn't actually change the problem obviously.
Plus if the compiler recognised n(x+y) style notation I think you'd end up with some code ambiguity if you tried to use indexing...
|
|
|
I don't get tired of reading this thread and all the people giving wrong answers and saying others are dumb at the same time. Only 2 in this last page (72) got it right, and about 15 got it wrong. After 72 people still didn't notice it, and keep calling others stupid... wow. This is awesome ^^
edit: 3 wrong and 1 right on page 73 so far!
|
On April 09 2011 00:36 dogmeatstew wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2011 00:32 Wonderballs wrote:On April 09 2011 00:27 hiddink wrote:perl wins as with many other inconsistencies with the problem, the computer has no idea how to interpret the parenthesis if there is no operator between it and the previous term. It's a matter of programming logic than actual algebra. MATLAB OUTPUT >> 48/2(9+3) ??? 48/2(9+3) | Error: Unbalanced or unexpected parenthesis or bracket. The implied multiplication of n(x+y) style expressions doesn't go over well with compilers its true but adding in the '*' operator is legitimate and doesn't actually change the problem obviously. Plus if the compiler recognised n(x+y) style notation I think you'd end up with some code ambiguity if you tried to use indexing...
Yes absolutely correct. There is missing information.
# of unknowns > # of equations.
therefore solution does not exist.
|
I'm doing mathematics at one of the top universities in the UK (for what its worth) and my thought is that you deal with any brackets first, so therefore the answer should be 2. So it should be done:
48÷2(9+3)=
48÷2(12)=
48÷24=
2
Thats my 2 cents anyways.
|
no idea what u people are thinking.. its 288 LOL
|
Anybody remember "BEMDAS" which is the order of how algebraic questons must be solved.
Brackets
Exponential
Multiplication
Division
Additon
Subtraction
I'm an engineer, the answer is 2
|
On April 09 2011 00:35 Sneakyz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2011 00:31 trainRiderJ wrote:On April 09 2011 00:29 Insanious wrote:On April 09 2011 00:27 hiddink wrote:perl wins Um... you changed the notation, you added in the multiplication symbol into the equation because 48/2*(9+3) is very different than 48÷2(9+3) Actually no, those two statements are equivalent. An implied multiplication operation has no higher or lower priority than an explicit one. Indeed, they both equal 288.
48/2*(9/3) always = (48/2)*(9+3) 100% of the time
but the ÷ allows for interpretation of 48÷2(9+3) as either
48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)*(9+3)
- - - -
For me, I have Math exams, Economics exams, and Statistics exams from my university that have similar questions to 48/2(9+3) = 48/(2(9+3)).
This is just how my school does it's notation.
48/2*(9+3) = 288
48/2(9+3) = 2
|
always nice to see that the majority of people fail at simple math
makes me feel somewhat better about myself, especially considering how I've never been that good at math in school
|
On April 09 2011 00:41 Jhax wrote:
Anybody remember "BEMDAS" which is the order of how algebraic questons must be solved.
Brackets
Exponential
Multiplication
Division
Additon
Subtraction
I'm an engineer, the answer is 2
LOL I feel so bad for whatever "engineer" you are.
Actually bro, the M and D and A and S are on the same tier, and you do those left to right. Maybe you should try something that doesn't involve math.
|
Bedmas
Brackets = the 9 + 3 = 12
Then it becomes 48 / 2 (12)
The 12 in the bracket is the same thing as 2 x 12
Division before multiplication.
48/2(12)
24(12)
288
EZPZ, grade 12 highschool student
Well it doesn't matter which train of thought you follow to either 2 or 288, this is absolutely most definitely wrong. You ALWAYS solve brackets before dividing, so you HAVE to 2 * 12 before 48/...
|
Math, the language that cannot lie. Obviously depending on school, local notation habits and intepreation rules. The universal language is not universal at all =(
|
the way it is written you can interpret it either way, if you write it as a division the answer is 2 but if you write it as a fraction then the answer is 288
to clarify you would normally write it as
48(9+3) {over} 2 = 288
<=>
48{over}2 (9+3) = 288
or as
48{over}2(9+3) = 2
<=> 24{over}(9+3) = 2
also 1/2x is clearly 1/(2x), otherwise you have to write x*1/2 or simply x/2 to mean (1/2)x since the format is bad and requires you to be extra clear with what you mean
bascially it isn't a math problem at all but a question of how you interpret the format
P.S.
people should be carefull about thinking of a parenthesis as "multiplication" because it isn't.
for example:
d{over}dx (x+x) = 2
an operator applied to a parenthesis is taken to mean applying the operator to everything in the parenthesis, but as we all know you cannot multiply with an operator thus you cannot interpret a parenthesis to mean multiplication but instead a shorthand for what is taken to be common knowledge
P.SS.
in this case I should add, you normally take the original post to mean 288 but it isn't clear at all, also the problem has nothing to do with actual mathematics
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48/2(9+3)
|
Kentor
United States5784 Posts
On April 09 2011 00:44 Pufftrees wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2011 00:41 Jhax wrote:
Anybody remember "BEMDAS" which is the order of how algebraic questons must be solved.
Brackets
Exponential
Multiplication
Division
Additon
Subtraction
I'm an engineer, the answer is 2 LOL I feel so bad for whatever "engineer" you are. Actually bro, the M and D and A and S are on the same tier, and you do those left to right. Maybe you should try something that doesn't involve math.
yeah, because engineers experience something like 48÷2(9+3) in their jobs or research. the condescension in this thread is getting annoying
|
On April 09 2011 00:44 Pufftrees wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2011 00:41 Jhax wrote:
Anybody remember "BEMDAS" which is the order of how algebraic questons must be solved.
Brackets
Exponential
Multiplication
Division
Additon
Subtraction
I'm an engineer, the answer is 2 LOL I feel so bad for whatever "engineer" you are. Actually bro, the M and D and A and S are on the same tier, and you do those left to right. Maybe you should try something that doesn't involve math.
By the use of the word "bro" im assuming you don't do anything in the scientific line. You also completely ignored the most important part of BEMDAS which is the B as in brackets.
|
On April 09 2011 00:48 Ceril wrote:
Math, the language that cannot lie. Obviously depending on school, local notation habits and intepreation rules. The universal language is not universal at all =(
if($simple_math_problem !== 'solved'):
conspirancy(2012);
endif;
congratz, this thread will make the world blow up in smoke.
|
Ohhh I know whats the common misconception.
Misconception is
48
---------
2(9+3)
(9+3), answer of it multiply by 2 as you open the bracket, and do left to right which is 48 Divided by 24
my steps:
48÷2(9+3)
= 48÷2(12) <-- (12) is actually *12 or something multiplied by 12. (12) itself has no priority since there is nothing to multiply inside so you open the brackets to reveal its hidden "multiply" sign.
= 48÷2*12 <------ you dont take 2 multiply by 12 since multiplication and division are on the same level therefore, read left to right.
ans: 288
You will only get 2 if the equation is this: 48÷[2(9+3)]
this is because you have to do the inner brackets first and the outer brackets before getting that value to be divided to 48
right..?
|
48/2*(9+3) = 288
48/2(9+3) = 2
That is how it is in my head  I know it's wrong, but to me this is just an optical illusion or whatever, doesnt really have a lot to do with math.
Where i come from we always write x*(xx) not x(xx). And we never use that division sign either (not since like 3rd grade). So you are just tricking people by writing something that they aren't used to seeing, if it was written "correctly" 99% of everyone here would get it right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
