| Page 1 of 3 |
| 2 or 288 |
| 2 |
|
32% |
[ 14 ] |
| 288 |
|
67% |
[ 29 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 43 |
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 03:15 Post subject: 48/2(9+3) |
|
 |
I've seen this posted around the internet and no general concensus can be reached. Is the answer 2 or 288?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 03:24 Post subject: |
|
|
288
The Only Good Communist Is A Very Dead Communist
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ixigia
[Moderator] Consigliere
Posts: 65089
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 03:30 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 03:58 Post subject: |
|
|
lol, does ( trump / unconditionally when it comes it BEDMAS? I think so, the problem could be written the other way too.
I say 288 as written
asus z170-A || core i5-6600K || geforce gtx 970 4gb || 16gb ddr4 ram || win10 || 1080p led samsung 27"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 04:00 Post subject: |
|
|
The World’s #1 Bodybuilding And Fitness Forum to the rescue!
 Spoiler: | they probably still would kick my ass  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 05:23 Post subject: Re: 48/2(9+3) |
|
|
Multiplication and division are of equal value in order of operations, parenthesis is the only thing here that changes order... 48 / 2 * 12 is 288
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 06:24 Post subject: |
|
|
People this shit is like learned in grade school wtf.. : /
Walking like a madman on a barbed wire across the chaos of insanity
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 09:51 Post subject: |
|
|
Well if you write it in plain as the question is asked (confirmed by Mathematica) the answer is 288, but if you write it like Neon showed in the first way it's two...
Btw what do you need this for?
"Quantum mechanics is actually, contrary to it's reputation, unbeliveably simple, once you take the physics out."
Scott Aaronson | chiv wrote: | | thats true you know. newton didnt discover gravity. the apple told him about it, and then he killed it. the core was never found. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 09:54 Post subject: |
|
|
It's kinda around the internet, it's posted alot on 4chan for trolling purposes.
Walking like a madman on a barbed wire across the chaos of insanity
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 10:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Theres such a thing as rules in mathematics, this only works on numbfucks who didnt pay attention in gradeschool. To multiply or divide overgoes adding or detracting, however multiply doesnt overrule devide nor does devide overrule multiply. Therefor it depends on which order they are placed, first goes first.
The equation states : 48/2(9+3)
The brackets cause the adding part of the equasion has to be done first. So the equasion without brackets is this:
48/2*12.
Now we apply the rules of mathematics.
48/2=24*12=288.
How fucking stupid must you be to not know this.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73238
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 10:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| Neon wrote: | | If it's written 48/2(9+3) it can be either |
Incorrect. The way it is written is very clear to be (48/2)(9+3), which means only one of the answers is correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-=Cartoon=-
VIP Member
Posts: 8823
Location: South Pacific Ocean
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 10:52 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73238
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 11:24 Post subject: |
|
|
9+3=12 as in 2012  
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 11:25 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-=Cartoon=-
VIP Member
Posts: 8823
Location: South Pacific Ocean
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 11:26 Post subject: |
|
|
I suck at maths.. like.. literally ..
My maths skills go as far as figuring out how to turn on a calculator
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73238
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 12:39 Post subject: |
|
|
"How you read the equation" 
By this logic, 3/1+2 could equal 1 because one could read it the way he wants. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 12:48 Post subject: |
|
|
What the fuck is this "how you read" bullshit.
- Rule #1: () over * or / over + or -
- Rule #2: Equal operators are applied in sequence
Applying it to 42/2(9+3) results in:
42/2(9+3) => 42/2*12 - parenthesis first
42/2*12 => 24*12 - Equal operators, so we do them in sequence
24*12 => 288 - Only one operator left.
There's no "way" of reading it when it's typed out like that. Your first example would be typed out as 42/(2(9+3)) Neon. You're right in that when writing it on paper like you show it does make a difference, but when it's typed like this there is absolutely no room for interpretation - that is why parenthesis are used in the first place.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73238
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 12:53 Post subject: |
|
|
| Neon wrote: | But you don't write 3/1+2 on paper, you write
so this whole problem is only a problem on the internet forums where you can't write equations like you do on paper. Obviously if it was written in a "normal" form it would equal 288, but if you use 48/2(9+3) you can't be sure if (9+3) is a modifier to "2" in the fraction or is, in fact, a factor to multiplying. |
As a matter of fact, a lot of people do write it in this form, even on paper. Writing fractions in their large form as you suggest is often space costly and unnecessary. Abut the "you can't be sure", oh? And why are you so sure about my example? The one who wrote the equation either meant it to be 288 as math rules state, or was dumb enough to not understand the rules.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 12:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe it's different in other countries, but all of the people I know write the fractions in the "large" form, so maybe I view this problem differently. Anyway, we both agree that the answer is 288, but it might be unclear whether (9+3) is a modifier to a fraction or a factor to multiplying.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 13:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| Neon wrote: | | Maybe it's different in other countries, but all of the people I know write the fractions in the "large" form, so maybe I view this problem differently. Anyway, we both agree that the answer is 288, but it might be unclear whether (9+3) is a modifier to a fraction or a factor to multiplying. |
No, in any beta studies you'll find that almost everyone uses the scientific (i.e. the one you can type) form. At least everyone I've met.
And there is nothing unclear here, like I said, extra parenthesis would have been used. The only people who don't get that are dumb fucks who haven't had basic maths or are just plain dumb (this is something I learned in "high school" first grade when I was friggin' 11). The *only* way the 2 could have ANYTHING to do with the (9+3) was if the two had been enclosed by an extra pair of parenthesis. Period.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73238
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 13:11 Post subject: |
|
|
What was the conclusion in the body building forum?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garus
VIP Member
Posts: 34197
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 13:14 Post subject: |
|
|
snip
Last edited by garus on Tue, 27th Aug 2024 21:48; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nalo
nothing
Posts: 13522
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Apr 2011 13:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Last edited by Nalo on Wed, 3rd Jul 2024 06:51; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
