storm2006
Supporter
- 29,035
- 64,028
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2001
48÷2(9+3) = ???
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by n1k3b4ller,
- Start date
storm2006
Supporter
- 29,035
- 64,028
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2001
kingcrux31
Staff member
- 7,360
- 1,031
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2002
O'RLY?
Show me where my solution is different from theirs.
As far as I know every member who posted 2 agree why the answer is such including myself. You 288'ers on the other hand.
kingcrux31
Staff member
- 7,360
- 1,031
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2002
O'RLY?
Show me where my solution is different from theirs.
As far as I know every member who posted 2 agree why the answer is such including myself. You 288'ers on the other hand.
- 8,712
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
is it even possible to derail this thread?
the answer is obviously 2, if you didn't get 2 you obviously play for team to-eaigtyate
the answer is obviously 2, if you didn't get 2 you obviously play for team to-eaigtyate
- 8,712
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
is it even possible to derail this thread?
the answer is obviously 2, if you didn't get 2 you obviously play for team to-eaigtyate
the answer is obviously 2, if you didn't get 2 you obviously play for team to-eaigtyate
- 20,015
- 9,745
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2001
I go to Vegas for a weekend and come back to this thread being quadruple what it was....
- 20,015
- 9,745
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2001
I go to Vegas for a weekend and come back to this thread being quadruple what it was....
balloonoboy
Banned
- 9,784
- 481
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
You obviously missed the point she made that such a problem is rare and sure to incite arguments.
She is not overriding PEMDAS, just treating 2(9+3) as a parenthetical phrase that must be resolved first. Put it like this, a parenthesis is like a black hole, it has a strong attraction to everything surrounding it. Since the division sign - or multiplication sign, if there was one - NOTE: 2x(9+3) =/= 2(9+3) - separates the 28 from the parenthesis, it is the only number, that is not attracted to the parenthesis.
balloonoboy
Banned
- 9,784
- 481
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
You obviously missed the point she made that such a problem is rare and sure to incite arguments.
She is not overriding PEMDAS, just treating 2(9+3) as a parenthetical phrase that must be resolved first. Put it like this, a parenthesis is like a black hole, it has a strong attraction to everything surrounding it. Since the division sign - or multiplication sign, if there was one - NOTE: 2x(9+3) =/= 2(9+3) - separates the 28 from the parenthesis, it is the only number, that is not attracted to the parenthesis.
- 3,997
- 92
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2002
- 3,997
- 92
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2002
- 1,871
- 11
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
I had a dream about this last night..WHAT IN THE WORLD ?!
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
It was wild man. I just realized it as soon as I saw this thread in class today. Same thing.
It was pretty nostalgic.
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
Originally Posted by do work son
i had the same dream
asked my math teacher, then saw the science teacher that hated me. felt like i was back in middle school again, until i woke up for my 8 AM
It was wild man. I just realized it as soon as I saw this thread in class today. Same thing.
It was pretty nostalgic.
- 1,871
- 11
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
I had a dream about this last night..WHAT IN THE WORLD ?!
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
It was wild man. I just realized it as soon as I saw this thread in class today. Same thing.
It was pretty nostalgic.
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
Originally Posted by do work son
i had the same dream
asked my math teacher, then saw the science teacher that hated me. felt like i was back in middle school again, until i woke up for my 8 AM
It was wild man. I just realized it as soon as I saw this thread in class today. Same thing.
It was pretty nostalgic.
do work son
Banned
- 17,118
- 5,186
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
Originally Posted by snakeyes17
I had a dream about this last night..WHAT IN THE WORLD ?!
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
i had the same dream
asked my math teacher, then saw the science teacher that hated me. felt like i was back in middle school again, until i woke up for my 8 AM
do work son
Banned
- 17,118
- 5,186
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
Originally Posted by snakeyes17
I had a dream about this last night..WHAT IN THE WORLD ?!
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
i had the same dream
asked my math teacher, then saw the science teacher that hated me. felt like i was back in middle school again, until i woke up for my 8 AM
- 2,804
- 82
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2008
Technically it does. You can say that 1 is being multiplied by what is in the parenthesis. But this is getting out of hand y'all are still debating over this. This problem is too ambiguous.Originally Posted by inspectah derek
Division sure is the inverse of multiplication. But parentheses don't necessarily mean multiplication.
http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa040502a.htm
- 2,804
- 82
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2008
Technically it does. You can say that 1 is being multiplied by what is in the parenthesis. But this is getting out of hand y'all are still debating over this. This problem is too ambiguous.Originally Posted by inspectah derek
Division sure is the inverse of multiplication. But parentheses don't necessarily mean multiplication.
http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa040502a.htm
- 167
- 27
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
Anyone who is against doing this step first?
Restate 48÷2 as 48*1/2 or 48*(1/2), same thing. It is 1/2, not 2, that should be distributed to the (9+3).
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 24*12
= 288
or if you choose to distribute...
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 48*(4.5+1.5)
= 216+72
=288
Restate 48÷2 as 48*1/2 or 48*(1/2), same thing. It is 1/2, not 2, that should be distributed to the (9+3).
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 24*12
= 288
or if you choose to distribute...
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 48*(4.5+1.5)
= 216+72
=288
- 167
- 27
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
Anyone who is against doing this step first?
Restate 48÷2 as 48*1/2 or 48*(1/2), same thing. It is 1/2, not 2, that should be distributed to the (9+3).
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 24*12
= 288
or if you choose to distribute...
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 48*(4.5+1.5)
= 216+72
=288
Restate 48÷2 as 48*1/2 or 48*(1/2), same thing. It is 1/2, not 2, that should be distributed to the (9+3).
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 24*12
= 288
or if you choose to distribute...
48÷2(9+3)
= 48*(1/2)*(9+3)
= 48*(4.5+1.5)
= 216+72
=288
- 1,871
- 11
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
Oh I'm sorry let's disregard the greatest computer innovation of 2009 according to Popular Science.Originally Posted by BC2310
I do not trust the german site and it's feasible that any math software would use both signs interchangeably which is incorrect.Originally Posted by NikeVandal
Originally Posted by BC2310
NO ONE CAN DEFEND MYALGEBRA.COM
ANYONE GETTING HEATED OVER THIS IS LOSING AT LIFE
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY I'M TYPING IN CAPS
Team2 btw
COMPUTATIONAL KNOWLEDGE ENGINE > My ALGEBRA
youre trying to tell me your toyota corolla is better than my ferrari
Unfortunately the og division symbol is so old and played out it has little relevance today, until some trolling genius came up with this poorly written 'simple' equation.
Why do you think it's written that way everywhere? and not with / ? with / it's 288 with the og division symbol it's 2.
let's be real U Mad b/c I made fun of your all cap know it all message board style
I'm sure this website running on over 10,000 computers is sure to get the wrong answer to a simple algebra problem.
And it gets 288 if you use ÷ or / in the problem.
But let's go with a no name website myalgebra.com....yeah.
Thank you MathGod
hope this lulls Crux to sleep
also, smh at not knowing the other night, was sleepy
This is correct. Distribution is a function of multiplication. You must perform division first in this problem.
Actually, you're wrong.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Distributing a number NOT DIRECTLY ATTACHED to ( ) is WRONG.Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69
Thank you MathGod
hope this lulls Crux to sleep
also, smh at not knowing the other night, was sleepy
It's becoming more and more evident how many of you don't know what you're talking about.
But I could predict your response would just be "Troll
- 1,871
- 11
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
Oh I'm sorry let's disregard the greatest computer innovation of 2009 according to Popular Science.Originally Posted by BC2310
I do not trust the german site and it's feasible that any math software would use both signs interchangeably which is incorrect.Originally Posted by NikeVandal
Originally Posted by BC2310
NO ONE CAN DEFEND MYALGEBRA.COM
ANYONE GETTING HEATED OVER THIS IS LOSING AT LIFE
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY I'M TYPING IN CAPS
Team2 btw
COMPUTATIONAL KNOWLEDGE ENGINE > My ALGEBRA
youre trying to tell me your toyota corolla is better than my ferrari
Unfortunately the og division symbol is so old and played out it has little relevance today, until some trolling genius came up with this poorly written 'simple' equation.
Why do you think it's written that way everywhere? and not with / ? with / it's 288 with the og division symbol it's 2.
let's be real U Mad b/c I made fun of your all cap know it all message board style
I'm sure this website running on over 10,000 computers is sure to get the wrong answer to a simple algebra problem.
And it gets 288 if you use ÷ or / in the problem.
But let's go with a no name website myalgebra.com....yeah.
Thank you MathGod
hope this lulls Crux to sleep
also, smh at not knowing the other night, was sleepy
This is correct. Distribution is a function of multiplication. You must perform division first in this problem.
Actually, you're wrong.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Distributing a number NOT DIRECTLY ATTACHED to ( ) is WRONG.Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69
Thank you MathGod
hope this lulls Crux to sleep
also, smh at not knowing the other night, was sleepy
It's becoming more and more evident how many of you don't know what you're talking about.
But I could predict your response would just be "Troll
- 2,057
- 11
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2009
Originally Posted by Storm2006
how did this thread get to 127 pages so quickly?
- 2,057
- 11
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2009
Originally Posted by Storm2006
how did this thread get to 127 pages so quickly?
- 8,941
- 5,398
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2005
I've asked 10 people and they all said 288.