48÷2(9+3) = ???

[pacmagic2002]

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

/thread......(dont really close it, but this is how people getting 2 should look at it)

 

[cronicmolemolereturns]

SOO MUCH COLLEGE DEGREES IN QUESTION OVER BASIC MATH

 

[cronicmolemolereturns]

SOO MUCH COLLEGE DEGREES IN QUESTION OVER BASIC MATH

 

[an dee 51o]

Originally Posted by Carver

You don't need a math degree to know it's 288 but since your pops does it makes it more right

True, but my dad is literally a math genius. Turned down going to MIT because Northwestern gave him a full ride.

Originally Posted by DangerousG

With all due respect, your dad needs to return that degree.

Where did you attend school?

 

[danger style]

Originally Posted by an dee 51o

The answer is 288


My dad has a MATH degree from Northwestern and I just showed him the problem. He said he sees how it could be mistaken to be 2, but the answer is

288

/thread

With all due respect, your dad needs to return that degree.

THE ANSWER IS 2

 

[an dee 51o]

Originally Posted by Carver

You don't need a math degree to know it's 288 but since your pops does it makes it more right

True, but my dad is literally a math genius. Turned down going to MIT because Northwestern gave him a full ride.

Originally Posted by DangerousG

With all due respect, your dad needs to return that degree.

Where did you attend school?

 

[danger style]

Originally Posted by an dee 51o

The answer is 288


My dad has a MATH degree from Northwestern and I just showed him the problem. He said he sees how it could be mistaken to be 2, but the answer is

288

/thread

With all due respect, your dad needs to return that degree.

THE ANSWER IS 2

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by pacmagic2002

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

/thread......(dont really close it, but this is how people getting 2 should look at it)

if it's the way you say it is, why isn't the problem written as (48/2)*(9+3)

 

[zk1mpls]

Originally Posted by HankMoody

Someone copy and paste the bolded part of the link I posted... I can't do it on an IPad

It's 2!

I got you, fam

Thegeneral consensus among math people is that "multiplication byjuxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next toeach other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that thejuxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing otheroperations. But not all software is programmed this way, and sometimes teachers view things differently. If in doubt, ask! - http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops2.htm

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by pacmagic2002

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

/thread......(dont really close it, but this is how people getting 2 should look at it)

if it's the way you say it is, why isn't the problem written as (48/2)*(9+3)

 

[zk1mpls]

Originally Posted by HankMoody

Someone copy and paste the bolded part of the link I posted... I can't do it on an IPad

It's 2!

I got you, fam

Thegeneral consensus among math people is that "multiplication byjuxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next toeach other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that thejuxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing otheroperations. But not all software is programmed this way, and sometimes teachers view things differently. If in doubt, ask! - http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops2.htm

 

[Mark Antony]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

Actually, because the 2 and the (12) are touching, the division would act like a separator. You have to reconcile the 2 and the 12 in parentheses before you move on. If you're showing your work and then you rewrite it as 48/2*12, you're doing it wrong. It still needs to be written as 48/2(12), and the parentheses need to be reconciled before you move on to the division part of the problem.

I actually agree with you now looking at it, arbitrarily removed the parenthesis.
Which is exactly why dudes need to calm down.  I'm on the 2 now.

 

[Mark Antony]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

Actually, because the 2 and the (12) are touching, the division would act like a separator. You have to reconcile the 2 and the 12 in parentheses before you move on. If you're showing your work and then you rewrite it as 48/2*12, you're doing it wrong. It still needs to be written as 48/2(12), and the parentheses need to be reconciled before you move on to the division part of the problem.

I actually agree with you now looking at it, arbitrarily removed the parenthesis.
Which is exactly why dudes need to calm down.  I'm on the 2 now.

 

[hankmoody]

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

Actually, because the 2 and the (12) are touching, the division would act like a separator. You have to reconcile the 2 and the 12 in parentheses before you move on. If you're showing your work and then you rewrite it as 48/2*12, you're doing it wrong. It still needs to be written as 48/2(12), and the parentheses need to be reconciled before you move on to the division part of the problem.

I actually agree with you now looking at it, arbitrarily removed the parenthesis.
Which is exactly why dudes need to calm down.  I'm on the 2 now.

THAT WAS QUICK!!

 

[hankmoody]

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

Actually, because the 2 and the (12) are touching, the division would act like a separator. You have to reconcile the 2 and the 12 in parentheses before you move on. If you're showing your work and then you rewrite it as 48/2*12, you're doing it wrong. It still needs to be written as 48/2(12), and the parentheses need to be reconciled before you move on to the division part of the problem.

I actually agree with you now looking at it, arbitrarily removed the parenthesis.
Which is exactly why dudes need to calm down.  I'm on the 2 now.

THAT WAS QUICK!!

 

[rocky437]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by pacmagic2002

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

/thread......(dont really close it, but this is how people getting 2 should look at it)

if it's the way you say it is, why isn't the problem written as (48/2)*(9+3)

 

[rocky437]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by pacmagic2002

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

/thread......(dont really close it, but this is how people getting 2 should look at it)

if it's the way you say it is, why isn't the problem written as (48/2)*(9+3)

 

[jhova718]

the answer is 2

 

[jhova718]

the answer is 2

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

Actually, because the 2 and the (12) are touching, the division would act like a separator. You have to reconcile the 2 and the 12 in parentheses before you move on. If you're showing your work and then you rewrite it as 48/2*12, you're doing it wrong. It still needs to be written as 48/2(12), and the parentheses need to be reconciled before you move on to the division part of the problem.

There is NOTHING that needs to be reconciled in the parenthesis.  Its now just a number.  The parenthesis was already reconciled when 9 was added to 3.  Parenthesis completed.

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by Mark Antony

Ok now it's clear why some of ya'll wanted the thread open, so you could flaunt your mental superiority 

.  Calm down bro, it's a basic math problem.  Though different perspectives, no need to be calling people tards.
For the people getting 2, only way that would be the case is if there was also a parenthesis beginning at 2 and ending after the one at 3.  ie 48/(2(9+3)) which it isn't.  That dividing line only relates to that one number, so you have to treat 48/2 seperately, that when you get to 48/2(12) it's essentially (48/2)*(12).  So going left to right using the rule it's 24*12 which is 288.

Actually, because the 2 and the (12) are touching, the division would act like a separator. You have to reconcile the 2 and the 12 in parentheses before you move on. If you're showing your work and then you rewrite it as 48/2*12, you're doing it wrong. It still needs to be written as 48/2(12), and the parentheses need to be reconciled before you move on to the division part of the problem.

There is NOTHING that needs to be reconciled in the parenthesis.  Its now just a number.  The parenthesis was already reconciled when 9 was added to 3.  Parenthesis completed.

 

[jhova718]

parenthesis dont cease to exist because you solved whats inside of them. the answer is 2.

 

[jhova718]

parenthesis dont cease to exist because you solved whats inside of them. the answer is 2.

 

[fullmetal]

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

Originally Posted by FullMetal

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

Yeah okay but in 48/2(12) division comes before multiplication. 

PARENTHESIS FIRST HOW IS IT SO HARD. GOTTA GET RID OF THE PARENTHESIS NOT JUST DO WHATS INSIDE OF IT. YES CAPS LOCK. (actual accident but im not backspacing)

Proof that you have to deal with everything around the parenthesis first? I'm pretty sure you ONLY have to deal with whats inside first, then you compute from left to right (in this problem). If what you said is correct, tell me why the most advanced calculators give you 288 as the answer when you input this original equation as it is written in the original post.

 

[fullmetal]

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

Originally Posted by FullMetal

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

Yeah okay but in 48/2(12) division comes before multiplication. 

PARENTHESIS FIRST HOW IS IT SO HARD. GOTTA GET RID OF THE PARENTHESIS NOT JUST DO WHATS INSIDE OF IT. YES CAPS LOCK. (actual accident but im not backspacing)

Proof that you have to deal with everything around the parenthesis first? I'm pretty sure you ONLY have to deal with whats inside first, then you compute from left to right (in this problem). If what you said is correct, tell me why the most advanced calculators give you 288 as the answer when you input this original equation as it is written in the original post.