REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events

Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events The off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.

View Poll Results: 48÷2(9+3)
2 217 59.62%
288 147 40.38%
Voters: 364. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-12-2011, 12:06 PM   #76
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,304
Thanked 343 Times in 132 Posts
Failed 319 Times in 77 Posts
Advertisement
Teh Doucher is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 12:20 PM   #77
Zombie Mod
 
Presto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Langley
Posts: 9,919
Thanked 5,201 Times in 1,570 Posts
Failed 120 Times in 54 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.T View Post
it's ambiguous because when someone asks you to interpret 1/2x you don't know whether they mean (1/2)x or 1/(2x). 9 times out of 10 they mean 1/(2x) because the 2 and the x are implied to be together and they are either lazy (bastards!) or don't know how to use brackets to avoid confusion.

I'm not saying interpreting it as 1/(2x) is 'correct'. The first thing I would do is get them to clarify if they mean

(1/2)x or
1/(2x)

that's the proper way to type out the equation to avoid confusion.
I can understand the need for clarification once you start having to solve for 'x', but you kinda lost me on the ambiguity of this thread's particular equation. Though poorly written, it's written in a way that is solvable with conventional means. There's not really any other way to approach it differently, if a person knows the rules.
__________________
Romans 10:9
Presto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 12:23 PM   #78
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 3,558
Thanked 3,814 Times in 957 Posts
Failed 715 Times in 210 Posts
rofl at all these debates. Those who have done enough math will naturally think it's 48/2(9+3) and get 2. Those who got numbers other than 2, no amount of explanations will help you.
flagella is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 12:29 PM   #79
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Sandman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,337
Thanked 298 Times in 53 Posts
Failed 178 Times in 41 Posts
LOL at 68 votes for 2, and how Presto is just repeating the same thing over and over.
__________________
"i'm a nobody , nobody's perfect , therefore im perfect."

"stupidity is not a handicap, park elsewere"
Sandman is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
This post FAILED by:
Old 04-12-2011, 12:37 PM   #80
I *Fwap* *Fwap* *Fwap* to RS
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,567
Thanked 238 Times in 94 Posts
Failed 121 Times in 27 Posts
^ we can't fail Mod anyway ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Great68 View Post
Typed verbatim into my Sharp scientific calculator, It gets 2.
__________________
Q: What do you like most in a woman?
A: My dick

Quote:
Originally Posted by JL9000 View Post
this is the internet and everyone knows better about what happened sitting behind a desk than the people who are actually involved.
buddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 12:42 PM   #81
Willing to sell a family member for a few minutes on RS
 
hotjoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Surrey
Posts: 12,760
Thanked 689 Times in 376 Posts
Failed 61 Times in 38 Posts
everyone here at work including myself say the answer is 288
hotjoint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 12:44 PM   #82
Zombie Mod
 
Presto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Langley
Posts: 9,919
Thanked 5,201 Times in 1,570 Posts
Failed 120 Times in 54 Posts
Fuck your calculators.

Solve it like a child in the 80s. Why don't one of you 71 savants walk me through how you came to the answer of 2?
__________________
Romans 10:9
Presto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 12:54 PM   #83
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 10,739
Thanked 5,280 Times in 1,946 Posts
Failed 185 Times in 100 Posts
Wow with the way Presto is going on about this you'd think we're pissing on his Doctorate of Mathematics paper.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2
2014 F150 5.0L XTR 4x4

A vehicle for all occasions
Great68 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 12:57 PM   #84
Ubereem Mod
 
Gt-R R34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond
Posts: 3,070
Thanked 120 Times in 63 Posts
Failed 24 Times in 10 Posts
THIS THREAD IS EPIC.

Time to ask a bunch of my staff what they get.

Got some Accutaries here. LOL this should be epic.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Culture_Vulture View Post
sometimes I like to use kindergarten art class scissors to cut my pubes
Gt-R R34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 12:59 PM   #85
I answer every Emotion with an emoticon
 
Nightwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,655
Thanked 443 Times in 188 Posts
Failed 83 Times in 34 Posts
48÷2(9+3)

is the same as:

48 ÷ 2 x (9+3)

So:

48 ÷ 2 x 12

24 x 12

288

Yeah?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajinHurricane View Post
who would ban me? lol. Look at my post count.
Nightwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 01:05 PM   #86
:inoutugh:
 
TOS'd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: GTA VI
Posts: 10,012
Thanked 5,864 Times in 1,851 Posts
Failed 970 Times in 279 Posts
48÷2(9+3) = 42

/thread
__________________
Posted from NE 1-J W Inglis Building
TOS'd is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 01:20 PM   #87
I answer every Emotion with an emoticon
 
Nightwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,655
Thanked 443 Times in 188 Posts
Failed 83 Times in 34 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOS'd View Post
48÷2(9+3) = 42

/thread
The answer is right, but what is the question?

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajinHurricane View Post
who would ban me? lol. Look at my post count.
Nightwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 01:22 PM   #88
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
twitchyzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 22,124
Thanked 9,915 Times in 3,934 Posts
Failed 881 Times in 421 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presto View Post
Why don't one of you 71 savants walk me through how you came to the answer of 2?
it was posted many times on page one and two. Like i said if you break it down into numerator and denominator you can see why the answer is two.
twitchyzero is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 01:47 PM   #89
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,105 Times in 540 Posts
Failed 555 Times in 222 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presto View Post
Sorry, how is the equation ambiguous? I really don't see how this can be. Is BEDMAS invalidated now that people are plugging numbers into the calculator? What rule are people using to come to the answer 2?
I wish we could fail mods, especially ones on a power trip. Thankfully, there's at least one member on here that gets it:

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.T
it's ambiguous because when someone asks you to interpret 1/2x you don't know whether they mean (1/2)x or 1/(2x). 9 times out of 10 they mean 1/(2x) because the 2 and the x are implied to be together (kinda like the 2(9+3) here) and they are either lazy (bastards!) or don't know how to use brackets to avoid confusion.

I'm not saying interpreting it as 1/(2x) is 'correct'. The first thing I would do is get them to clarify if they mean

(1/2)x or
1/(2x)

that's the proper way to type out the equation to avoid confusion.
Its funny, even with this, some people don't get it:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Presto
I can understand the need for clarification once you start having to solve for 'x', but you kinda lost me on the ambiguity of this thread's particular equation. Though poorly written, it's written in a way that is solvable with conventional means. There's not really any other way to approach it differently, if a person knows the rules.
I'll try and break it down into more simple terms for you:

Do you know what a unary operation is? Its an operation with only 1 operand. ie: -3

So what's the outcome of this?
-3^2

it could be:
-(3^2) = -9
(-3)^2 = 9

Cause BEDMAS does not apply to unary operators.

Notice how this equation is missing an operand between the "2" and the "(". We can assume this is an unary operand, in which case it could be expanded to either:
48 / [2 * (9+3)] = 2
48 / (2) * (9+3) = 288

Usually unary operands get evaluated first, anyone who develops software knows this cause "++" is a unary operand. Thus why some calculators are returning the answer as 2.

There's your math lesson for the day.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 01:52 PM   #90
Zombie Mod
 
Presto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Langley
Posts: 9,919
Thanked 5,201 Times in 1,570 Posts
Failed 120 Times in 54 Posts
^^^

Why assume anything? As soon as you have to throw in shit like unary to make it work, then you've already missed the point. Solve it like it's presented. Don't assume anything other than what is there. With the information that's presented (the equation), it's solvable by anyone with a grade school education.
__________________
Romans 10:9
Presto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 01:54 PM   #91
resident Oil Guru
 
LiquidTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,716
Thanked 10,457 Times in 1,794 Posts
Failed 1,065 Times in 267 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOS'd View Post
48÷2(9+3) = 42

/thread
Quoted, to immortalize your stupidity...
LiquidTurbo is offline   Reply With Quote
This post FAILED by:
Old 04-12-2011, 01:57 PM   #92
HELP ME PLS!!!
 
carisear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South Central V
Posts: 5,538
Thanked 519 Times in 210 Posts
Failed 55 Times in 21 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidTurbo View Post
Quoted, to immortalize your stupidity...

... you just Timpo'd ... you just don't get it.
__________________
Visit my food blog! http://jaxandcs.com/

*its not the size of your army that matters; it's the fury of it's onslaught!*

█♣█
carisear is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 01:58 PM   #93
xxx
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,405
Thanked 777 Times in 247 Posts
Failed 58 Times in 27 Posts
SpuGen = laughing his ass off right now
Oleophobic is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 02:00 PM   #94
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,105 Times in 540 Posts
Failed 555 Times in 222 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presto View Post
^^^

Why assume anything? As soon as you have to throw in shit like unary to make it work, then you've already missed the point. Solve it like it's presented. Don't assume anything other than what is there. With the information that's presented (the equation), it's solvable by anyone with a grade school education.
You cannot solve it as presented. You are assuming "2(" expands to "2 * (" since there is no rule for a bracket being an operator.

I understand where you're coming from, cause yes it is solvable by anyone with JUST a grade school education of BEDMAS. I have 4 years of university math, in particular physics and electronics math that is only solvable with assumptions. Thus my eye is more critical than the simple mind of a grade schooler who is going to assume "2(" expands to "2 * (".

As I pointed out, even my development environment is smart enough to warn me the equation is ambiguous - which is a far cry from grade school math.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 02:03 PM   #95
...in the world.
 
Ronin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Richmond
Posts: 28,466
Thanked 7,636 Times in 2,321 Posts
Failed 609 Times in 221 Posts
Ronin is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 02:05 PM   #96
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,105 Times in 540 Posts
Failed 555 Times in 222 Posts
Presto, no hard feelings. This is just the "plane on a conveyor belt" question all over again. We can debate this till the end of time - it all comes down to what assumptions you make.

My 4th year electronics prof never cared if we got the same answer as he did, he cared that we could justify our assumptions getting to our answer.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 02:21 PM   #97
Zombie Mod
 
Presto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Langley
Posts: 9,919
Thanked 5,201 Times in 1,570 Posts
Failed 120 Times in 54 Posts
No problem. You mention that there is no rule for bracket being an operator. I've always understood that no operator between the number and bracket means multiplication. Is that where the ambiguity comes from? Due to language of the software?
__________________
Romans 10:9
Presto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 02:29 PM   #98
Rs has made me the woman i am today!
 
Jgresch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: PM
Posts: 4,479
Thanked 3,349 Times in 843 Posts
Failed 207 Times in 86 Posts
I always assumed that meant multiplication.
Posted via RS Mobile
Jgresch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2011, 02:40 PM   #99
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,105 Times in 540 Posts
Failed 555 Times in 222 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presto View Post
I've always understood that no operator between the number and bracket means multiplication. Is that where the ambiguity comes from?


That's exactly where the ambiguity comes from. We can solve the ambiguity by figuring out where your understanding comes from. I couldn't find a hard rule about a bracket being a multiply operator - yet if you can, then no more ambiguity. Yet until you do, your understanding is actually an assumption.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-12-2011, 02:47 PM   #100
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
LUUUUUUUU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: vancouver
Posts: 3,824
Thanked 7,318 Times in 647 Posts
Failed 502 Times in 112 Posts
math sux
LUUUUUUUU is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:07 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