![]() |
This thread lets me know why I love the internet so much :D |
OP gave a question that hasn't been finished yet, this could be solved in more than 1 way and we aren't told what we are to use. IF we used just BEDMAS it would be 288 48/2(9+3) 48/2(12) Brackets Solved 24(12) Division and Multiplication solved from left to right 288 my answer using BEDMAS We were TAUGHT, well I was, that if an equation is followed by a bracket with a number or another equation in it we should multiply it after solving the bracketed equation first. If we used BEDMAS for 48/(2(9+3)) we would get: 48/(2(12)) 48/24 = 2 If I am incorrect my bad, im going off memory from 4 years ago lol. |
The answer is 42, guys. jeez... |
Brackets first always! Posted via RS Mobile |
BEDMAS? I got 288. Do thing inside brackets. Do division 48/2. so your left with 24*12 am i missing something here Quote:
if they really wanted it to be 48/(2(9+3)) then they would have put brackets since they put brackets on the (9+3). In this case, they didn't so its multiplication not brackets. (i can see this post being failed in the near future by those who don't agree with me, I FORESEE IT) |
Quote:
EDIT: Incidentally, Google will recognize numbers next to parentheses, and clarifies/corrects the equation: 48÷2(9+3) = (48 / 2) * (9 + 3) = 288 |
48/2(9+3) 48/18+6 48/24 =2 That's how my 17 year old cousin solved it.........weird |
48/2(9+3) = 48/18+6 = 2.6+6 = = 8.6 :troll: |
PEMDAS. Parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, subtraction. its 2... |
The question is ambiguous. There was this exact question over the BB forum with over 70+ pages.. |
Quote:
you stated it was multiplication first and then division. and you would get 2 wouldn't you haha I follow BEDMAS but i heard D and M can be interchangeable so I will no longer come back to this thread |
Quote:
|
Quote:
My Algebra 11 teacher had a favorite joke, "In Germany, you can't divide by nine!" - okay, it's an audible joke, only really works when said out loud, because of course, German for "no" is "nein", which of course, is pronounced like "nine". Mathematically, "no" doesn't work, but then, that's not the joke. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
Quote:
The way the question is worded, the conveyor belt is moving and the plane is applying enough force to maintain its relative position in space. The question is also worded that the conveyor belt will change speed to keep the plane in that relative position if the plane tries to change speed. Thus its a word problem, cause there's no way to apply it in real life. If the plane moves even a miniscule amount from its relative position, the conveyor belt has to change speed to compensate. If the plane doesn't return to its relative position, the conveyor keeps changing speed - then we get into a loop where the speed of the conveyor goes to infinity in zero time - and there's no conveyor in the world capable of doing this. Thus why there are entire websites dedicated to the physical limitations of how fast the conveyor could accelerate vs the plane accelerate vs the wheels burning off the plane. :) Its a really fun debate - yet it all comes down to if you assume its a physics problem, or a word problem. I assume word problem, as the physics are far too complicated and require way too many assumptions. |
Actually, the physics are dead easy, and Mythbusters addressed that when they summarized it: the plane is driven by the propeller, working against the air; force under the wheels is virtually irrelevant (calculable and measurable, yes, due to friction within the wheel bearings... but ultimately, not a factor). The argument works for a car on a conveyor belt, because the forward motion is a direct cause of the tires' contact with whatever surface they're on. A more valid argument for the plane would be whether a plane could stay stationary and still get airborn in a strong enough headwind - like the car, you're now working opposite the movement of what your engine is thrusting against. |
|
48 / 2(9+3) = 288 48 / (2(9+3)) = 2 im assuming we were all taught to multiply numbers into brackets. but we forgot that there are no brackets around 2(9+3), so we do it in the order it's shown as 48 / 2 x (9+3) |
bed motherf'in mas WHY HARD? |
|
^ I lol'd for the whole minute and 4 second ... |
successful troll op is successful |
trolls be trollin |
Wow....when did revscene become Bodybuilding.com Is this misc brah? |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net