[SpuGen]

Math Nerds. Attack.

2 Or 288?
BEDMAS? Or No?

[LiquidTurbo]

...........


I can't tell if you are serious.


Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[ae101]

its 2 we all know it but the computer reads it as 48÷2 & 9+3 then it end up with 24x12=288 in this case no one cares so me explaining it was useless

[SpuGen]

Why is it 2, and not 288? :troll:

[requieml]

its 2 we all know it but the computer reads it as 48÷2 & 9+3 then it end up with 24x12=288 in this case no one cares so me explaining it was useless

its 48÷2= 24 x (9+3) = 288.....

[ae101]

http://i54.tinypic.com/352kzgz.jpg
i be damn if this makes it to the fight club

[StylinRed]

sigh....


48/2*(9+3)

parentheses then left to right as multiplication doesn't take precedence over division (they're equal and so you go left to right)

so it becomes 48/2*12


bloody bodybuilding.com -_-


this was even posted on a trader forum, and all the traders got 288 and the non traders were freaking out cuz they got 2


here's a new way that bedmas/pedmas/pemdas/etc is explained

"Pandas Eat: Mustard on Dumplings, and Apples with Spice." The intention being that Mustard and Dumplings is a "dinner course" and that Apples and Spice is a "dessert course." Then it becomes not a linear string of operations to do one after the other, but rather the "dinner course" operations are considered together and performed left to right, and then addition and subtraction are considered together, again performed again left to right.

[MG1]

should have put a third possible answer.............

[Vansterdam]

LOL WUT?

[Hehe]

It's 288... because you need to solve the bracket first and the compute in order... so the question becomes

48÷2*(12)-->48÷2=24-->24*12=288.

Whoever getting 2 as result got confused with the bracket and thought it as..

48÷[2*(9+3)]

the original bracket was on 9+3.. but not the 2*... so you can't multiply them first and then settle the division.

[danned]

you do the multiples then dividen then do the plus or minus

[RacePace]

Why'd you have to bring this from the Misc, WHY

[jaguar604]

48÷[2*(9+3)]

the original bracket was on 9+3.. but not the 2*... so you can't multiply them first and then settle the division.

I couldn't even figure out how people were getting 2, thanks for posting that lol.

[Nightwalker]

Whoever getting 2 as result got confused with the bracket and thought it as..

48÷[2*(9+3)]

the original bracket was on 9+3.. but not the 2*... so you can't multiply them first and then settle the division.

How the fuck... I couldn't understand how anyone could get 2. That's pretty fail.

[Mizter]

I got 288...But I can also see why people would say 2.

[ShanghaiKid]

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

to be honest, i read it as 48 / 2 (9 + 3)

[Oleophobic]

If I had to give an answer I'd say 2 because more than likely the person giving this question intended it to be 2, but this is a definitely a troll question because it is ambiguous.

ambiguous and definitely bad form. I've had friends who took calc after me (same course but one semester after) ask me for help and occasionally stuff like this comes up and I'd have to ask them to clarify because they don't bother putting brackets where they should.

PS. wow haven't seen anyone use the "÷" symbol in years.


edited as i explained better in later posts

[RFlush]

I got 'Low Battery'
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3283/2364350004_6ec4c792b5.jpg

[buddy]

48÷2(9+3) = 2

(48÷2)(9+3) = 288

bracket(s) solve first - Grade 5 Math?

[TOS'd]

This puzzles me.

[!Aznboi128]

48÷2(9+3)

2 is part of the brackets

you can also think of it like this

__48__
2(9+3)

answer is 2

[RacingMetro92]

I got 2. If BEDMAS being drilled into you in HS doesn't work....then you got some problems if you do those skill testing questions they make you do if you wanna win stuff haha. You need to get rid of all brackets before moving onto the next operation i think. And as someone noted above, proper brackets are missing, so this just makes how to solve the question difficult and ambiguous on how to answer it.

I saw it as:
48÷2(9+3)
BRACKETS
48/2(12)
MULTIPLY(to get rid of all brackets first)
48/24
DIVIDE
2

[b0unce. [?]]

I believe the answer is 5.

[InvisibleSoul]

Google knows all.

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2213/calculation.jpg

[TRDood]

Who the fuck still uses ÷??

When you are in university it becomes "/". And yea, need more brackets to get a definite answer.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[ari.gold]

^ Same with excel (288)

The big difference is the ÷ symbol. If it were written 48/2, than the argument can be made for 2, but because it's ÷ the answer is 288.

84 pages arguing the answer lol
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=133389973

[woob]

Troll question: ambiguity sparks debate.

[Oleophobic]

I can totally see the people from The Real Hustle giving a question like this as a skill testing question for some fake non-existent prize.

[anti_rice]

BEDMAS works. You just need to know how to use BEDMAS. The answer is 288. 48÷2(9+3) is the same as 48 ÷ 2 x (9 + 3). Whoever thinks 2 is part of the bracket is wrong.

[Presto]

Fuck you, OP. RS is full of grade school dropouts that weren't listening during the BEDMAS and order of operations lessons. Therefore, this thread will never end. Even on something as absolute as math.

There's only 1 answer to this stupid equation, and it's 288. I'm sorry, but you're a fucking moron if you think otherwise.

The parameters of BEDMAS are not hard to follow. Stuff in brackets first, then from multiplication or division (going left to right).

48/2(9+3) BRACKETS
48/2(12) DIVIDE or MULTIPLY (from left to right)
24(12)
288 Answer

/thread

[Supafly]

holy shit, this is grade 10 math....now I can understand why some of the posts here on revscene have no relevance to the OP....Shitty Chinglish and now terrible math skills.

[fliptuner]

eleventeen?

[taylor192]

Its a poorly written equation. Just tried this in my development environment and it won't even pass compilation. 2(9+3) is ambiguous.

[Presto]

Fuck... I used up all my fails in this thread. I'm sure others will take the reins and fail all those suckers that got 2. Also, someone please fail the post right above this one, too.

[shenmecar]

no guys its 42

[RacingMetro92]

Fuck you, OP. RS is full of grade school dropouts that weren't listening during the BEDMAS and order of operations lessons. Therefore, this thread will never end. Even on something as absolute as math.

There's only 1 answer to this stupid equation, and it's 288. I'm sorry, but you're a fucking moron if you think otherwise.

The parameters of BEDMAS are not hard to follow. Stuff in brackets first, then from multiplication or division (going left to right).

48/2(9+3) BRACKETS
48/2(12) DIVIDE or MULTIPLY (from left to right)
24(12)
288 Answer

/thread

I think this is where shit gets messed up. You can look at this 2 different ways. You either do the 48/2 first, or because you see the bracket around the 12 you do the 2(12) first. This question is just trying to troll the shit out of people, 84 pages on bodybuilding.com just proves that.

[TRDeol]

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

48/24

=

2

:troll:

[Great68]

Typed verbatim into my Sharp scientific calculator, It gets 2.

[Presto]

All you idiots are hung up on the brackets. The only thing you need to worry about, in regards to brackets, is the equation within the brackets.

Here:
For those confused: 48/2(12) can also be written as:
48/2*12.

Apply BEDMAS to that, and you get 288.

[twitchyzero]

an easier way to do this is to split it into numerator and denominator.
so it's 48 over 2(9+3)...you first take the multiples of two so 2 becomes 1 and 48 becomes 24....so it's now 24 over (9+3)..which is 2.

I have to be honest here, I forgot what the E in BEDMAS stood for :devil:

[Jsunu]

Damn you troll math!

[twitchyzero]

don't want to thread jack, but can someone please confirm my math

1/0 =
http://www.aquiziam.com/pictures/end_world_nuke.jpg
?

[Great68]

All you idiots are hung up on the brackets. The only thing you need to worry about, in regards to brackets, is the equation within the brackets.

Here:
For those confused: 48/2(12) can also be written as:
48/2*12.

Apply BEDMAS to that, and you get 288.

Well, you could also write that equation as:

48
______
2(12)

Which is what I assume my calculator is doing.

[twitchyzero]

yeap except you meant 48

[Great68]

yeap except you meant 48

Yeah, typo. :p

[spoon.ek9]

good god.. this explains a lot on RS. i can't believe there's a debate on this.

[Presto]

Well, you could also write that equation as:

42
______
2(12)

Which is what I assume my calculator is doing.

Actually, re-written it's:

48
__ * 12
2

You still can't ignore BEDMAS.

[Great68]

Actually, re-written it's:

48
__ * 12
2


I stand by my calculator. It was programmed by those with much more math skills than either you or I.

[dkvby]

just say 2=X ... so the question will be 48/X(9+3) ..... answer is 2

u have to do 2(9+3) first, unless the question is 2*(9+3) then answer would be 288

[baggdis300]

you'd punch it in as (48/2(9+3)) = 48/24 = 2....


engineering FTW

[murd0c]

I never passed math in school. Accounting FTW
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Jgresch]

Whoever says this is grade 10 math needs to go back to grade 5 or 6 when we actually learned about this lol

[baggdis300]

I never passed math in school. Accounting FTW
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

lol, so you can't do complex mathmatics so you decided to stick with basic math, and peoples money


i'd totally get you to be my accountant...


:failed:

[Oleophobic]

Fuck... I used up all my fails in this thread. I'm sure others will take the reins and fail all those suckers that got 2. Also, someone please fail the post right above this one, too.

There's a reason why university professors, math teachers, calculators cannot come to an agreement on this.

It's a poorly written equation designed to spark a heated debate (which it has). An equation written in bad form begets ambiguity which begets multiple interpretations. Ask any knowledgeable math professor and he will tell you the equation is ambiguous because of the way it is written.

The only idiots are the ones who got something other than 2 or 288.


Get off your high horse.

[FerrariEnzo]

i think this should be in the FIGHT CLUB section.. haha

[dachinesedude]

calculator: 48 ÷ 2(9+3) = 2

excel: 48 / 2(9+3) = 288

excel: 48 / (2(9+3)) = 2

but seeing how its written like 48 ÷ 2(9+3), i say 2

[bloodmack]

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/database/QQ.09.07/h/brit1.html how to do bedmas lol

[t_sack]

who ever is getting a 2 is a retard.
BEDMAS is not wrong, learn how to apply it.
One more thing, I would trust excel more than the calculator most of the time.

[MG1]

BEDMAS works. You just need to know how to use BEDMAS. The answer is 288. 48÷2(9+3) is the same as 48 ÷ 2 x (9 + 3). Whoever thinks 2 is part of the bracket is wrong.

There's the word, "Bed" in it = winning!

remember the old grade four joke?

Add a girl, subtract her clothes, divide her legs, and multiply.

[Presto]

There's a reason why university professors, math teachers, calculators cannot come to an agreement on this.

It's a poorly written equation designed to spark a heated debate (which it has). An equation written in bad form begets ambiguity which begets multiple interpretations. Ask any knowledgeable math professor and he will tell you the equation is ambiguous because of the way it is written.

The only idiots are the ones who got something other than 2 or 288.


Get off your high horse.

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?

[murd0c]

lol, so you can't do complex mathmatics so you decided to stick with basic math, and peoples money


i'd totally get you to be my accountant...


:failed:

I said I took accounting in school not that I'm a accountant. There is a little difference I think.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[baggdis300]

no, you said accounting FTW

so i assumed you mean you are either taking accounting now, or are an accountant.

cause when i said engineering ftw, because im currently in school for mechanical engineering...

[TRDood]

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?

Bracket matter. Try to take the natural log on both sides. See what you get. It really depends on how you look at the equation.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[blagh]

48 ÷ 2(9+3)

48 ÷ 2(12)

48 ÷ 24

2


there's a bracket around the 12, so you would get rid of that first before you divide.

There is only one answer for this the way the OP posted. The only reason people get different answers is because the way their calculators interpret the answer.(Any scientific calculator will get 2)

LOL at how sure presto is about 288 being the answer

[InvisibleSoul]

48 ÷ 2(9+3)

48 ÷ 2(12)

48 ÷ 24

2


there's a bracket around the 12, so you would get rid of that first before you divide.
No, you only have to do stuff INSIDE brackets first. It's not necessarily so that you have to get rid of brackets.

48 ÷ 2(12) is the same as 48 ÷ 2 x 12.

[Presto]

there's a bracket around the 12, so you would get rid of that first before you divide.
Brackets come first in regards to equations within the brackets, which, in this case, was 9+3. There's no longer any equation within the brackets to deal with. The number 2, next to the bracket just means you multiply 2 by whatever is in there. You just have to look at it like this: 48 / 2 * 12, then apply BEDMAS.


I stand by my calculator. It was programmed by those with much more math skills than either you or I.

I don't doubt the calculator. The problem here is the operator, and how the data was entered. So, tell me, other than BEDMAS, what is the way to solve this. Again, the equation holds no ambiguity. It can and is solvable with BEDMAS.

The only way you can get this equation:

48
___
2(9+3)

is if the original equation (48÷2(9+3)) is written as 48÷(2(9+3))

[murd0c]

no, you said accounting FTW

so i assumed you mean you are either taking accounting now, or are an accountant.

cause when i said engineering ftw, because im currently in school for mechanical engineering...

In high school you could take accounting instead of match which I did. Grade 11 one year thats it in order to graduate. I don't deal with math what so ever in my line of work lol

[Great68]

DON'T IGNORE THE BEDMASSSSS ARGHTGHGHGHGHSAGHG!!! :fuuuuu:

[blagh]

No, you only have to do stuff INSIDE brackets first. It's not necessarily so that you have to get rid of brackets.

48 ÷ 2(12) is the same as 48 ÷ 2 x 12.

your saying that the brackets around the 12 are insignificant and just changing the "( )" to a "x" thus changing the meaning of the equation


48 ÷ 2(12)= 2

(put those into any scientific calculator and you can confirm)

48 ÷ 2 x 12=288

if you cant see why that is true then good luck to you

[Presto]

your saying that the brackets around the 12 are insignificant and just changing the "( )" to a "x" thus changing the meaning of the equation


48 ÷ 2(12)= 2

48 ÷ 2 x 12=288

if you cant see why that is true then good luck to you

:facepalm:

Back to grade 5 for you:

Order of Operations
Rule 1: First perform any calculations inside parentheses.
Rule 2: Next perform all multiplications and divisions, working from left to right.
Rule 3: Lastly, perform all additions and subtractions, working from left to right.


48 ÷ 2(12) =
24(12) = 288

[blagh]

:facepalm:

Back to grade 5 for you:



Have u finished grade 4 yet?

[smaggs]

Like someone said before, it's a bad layout of the equation and I haven't seen an actual division sign (can't even find one on my keyboard) in years. If the question had any importance and context of the numbers was known, or how the equation was derived, one could easily figure out how to properly lay it out.

As it is...Presto is correct and the answer is 288, however, the logical way of interpreting the badly laid out equation would get 2

[Ch28]

holy fuck there are a lot of dumbasses on RS

this is primary school mathematics!

[Oleophobic]

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?

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.

[xyz123]

I have to be honest here, I forgot what the E in BEDMAS stood for :devil:

Exponent =)

[Teh Doucher]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLw6smj0iyw

[Presto]

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.

[flagella]

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.

[Sandman]

LOL at 68 votes for 2, and how Presto is just repeating the same thing over and over.

[buddy]

^ we can't fail Mod anyway ...

Typed verbatim into my Sharp scientific calculator, It gets 2.

http://www.revscene.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5513&stc=1&d=1302631199

[hotjoint]

everyone here at work including myself say the answer is 288

[Presto]

Fuck your calculators.
http://i56.tinypic.com/16h6ja8.png
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?

[Great68]

Wow with the way Presto is going on about this you'd think we're pissing on his Doctorate of Mathematics paper.

[Gt-R R34]

THIS THREAD IS EPIC.

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

Got some Accutaries here. LOL this should be epic.

[Nightwalker]

48÷2(9+3)

is the same as:

48 ÷ 2 x (9+3)

So:

48 ÷ 2 x 12

24 x 12

288

Yeah?

[TOS'd]

48÷2(9+3) = 42

/thread

[Nightwalker]

48÷2(9+3) = 42

/thread

The answer is right, but what is the question?

:fullofwin:

[twitchyzero]

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.

[taylor192]

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:

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:

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.

[Presto]

^^^

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.

[LiquidTurbo]

48÷2(9+3) = 42

/thread

Quoted, to immortalize your stupidity... :fullofwin:

[carisear]

Quoted, to immortalize your stupidity... :fullofwin:


... you just Timpo'd ... you just don't get it.

[Oleophobic]

SpuGen = laughing his ass off right now

[taylor192]

^^^

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.

[Ronin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXw6znXPfy4

[taylor192]

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.

[Presto]

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?

[Jgresch]

I always assumed that meant multiplication.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[taylor192]

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. :thumbsup: Yet until you do, your understanding is actually an assumption. :p

[LUUUUUUUU]

math sux

[murd0c]

This thread lets me know why I love the internet so much :D

[bloodmack]

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.

[TOS'd]

The answer is 42, guys. jeez...

[optiblue]

Brackets first always!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Mining]

BEDMAS?

I got 288.

Do thing inside brackets. Do division 48/2. so your left with 24*12
am i missing something here

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 implied and people got lazy? since when ...
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)

[Presto]

:)

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. :thumbsup: Yet until you do, your understanding is actually an assumption. :p

That clears things up a bit, and I can understand your answer, but i doubt that a lot of people that got "2" came to the solution in the same way. While a number next to the parentheses is considered ambiguous to programming languages, with no hard math rule, it looks that the majority of folks still assumed multiplication, which was probably taught in school.
EDIT:
Incidentally, Google will recognize numbers next to parentheses, and clarifies/corrects the equation:
48÷2(9+3) = (48 / 2) * (9 + 3) = 288

[SaviorSelf_666]

48/2(9+3)
48/18+6
48/24
=2

That's how my 17 year old cousin solved it.........weird

[LUUUUUUUU]

48/2(9+3) =
48/18+6 =
2.6+6 =

= 8.6

:troll:

[Energy]

PEMDAS. Parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, subtraction. its 2...

[Purely]

The question is ambiguous. There was this exact question over the BB forum with over 70+ pages..

[Mining]

PEMDAS. Parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, subtraction. its 288...

If you followed PEMDAS

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

[woob]

i heard D and M can be interchangeable

Serious? Teacher never told you that whether you follow PEMDAS or BEDMAS it's D and M in the order that they appear?

[Soundy]

don't want to thread jack, but can someone please confirm my math

1/0 =
http://www.aquiziam.com/pictures/end_world_nuke.jpg
?

"Black holes are where God divided by zero."

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.

[Soundy]

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.
Yeah, except Mythbusters settled the plane-on-a-conveyor-belt issue already. :troll:

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.
Sounds like a good prof - critical thinking is one of the greatest skills anyone can learn.

[buddy]

will this solve our problem?

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

[taylor192]

Yeah, except Mythbusters settled the plane-on-a-conveyor-belt issue already. :troll:
Depends, a lot of people disagree with how mythbusters tackled it.

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.

[Soundy]

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.

[MRSky88]

http://img571.imageshack.us/i/stupidmathquestion.jpg/

???

[k3mps]

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)

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

bed motherf'in mas
WHY HARD?

[LUUUUUUUU]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv19iAncrrQ

[buddy]

^ I lol'd for the whole minute and 4 second ...

[jaguar604]

successful troll op is successful

[Grandmaster TSE]

trolls be trollin

[KingDeeCee]

Wow....when did revscene become Bodybuilding.com

Is this misc brah?

[MG1]

Actually, the physics are dead easy,

I learned physics by watching the Roadrunner.

I refer to one of my favourite episodes where Wylie Coyote points an electric fan towards the sail on a boat he is on and it moves, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

As Bugs Bunny would say, "I know this doesn't follow the laws of physics, but I never studied law!"

My other favourite episode.........


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJJW7EF5aVk


I love the musical score



Hey, this post is about as relevant to real life as the equation that has, what, taken up 6 pages so far?

[K.Dubz]

It's TWO! FFS!

You gotta remove the brackets first and to do so you gotta multiply the 2 to the numbers inside the brackets.


48 / 2(9+3)
= 48 / 18 + 6
= 48 / 24
= 2

[twitchyzero]

It's TWO! FFS!

You gotta remove the brackets first and to do so you gotta multiply the 2 to the numbers inside the brackets.


48 / 2(9+3)
= 48 / 18 + 6
= 48 / 24
= 2
if you follow that you would end up having to divide 48 by 18 first.

[Presto]

Okay... I had a nice bowl, and I have another way of presenting the equation. Instead of that confusing ÷ symbol, and fucking around with division. Let's multiply the inverse (witchcraft, for those not in the know):

48 ÷ 2(9+3)
48 * ½(9+3)
48 * 6
=288

[metal]

I cannot believe that this is 6 pages long.

[K.Dubz]

if you follow that you would end up having to divide 48 by 18 first.

Following BEDMAS you'd solve the brackets 1st, below is a clearer version of my answer

48 / 2(9+3)
= 48 / [2(9+3)]
= 48 / [18 + 6]
= 48 / 24
= 2

[Razor Ramon HG]

http://www.allkpop.com/2011/04/kwak-hyun-hwa-reveals-the-answer-to-48%C3%B7293

On April 11th, singer/gagwoman Kwak Hyun Hwa, who’s also a mathematics graduate from the prestigious Ewha Women’s University, revealed the answer to 48÷2(9+3).

This math problem has been circulating on many international forums lately, as users battled it out over whether the correct answer was ‘2′ or ‘288′.

The star confidently expressed through her me2day, “A lot of people have asked me through personal messages what the answer to 48÷2(9+3) is. The answer is 2!”

After she revealed her answer, Korean netizens began debating over whether or not her answer was correct.

To explain how Kwak Hyun Hwa got ‘2′ for her answer, she first solved the figures in the parentheses, then multiplied the sum by 2. The resulting number of 24 she used to divide 48, and ended up with the final answer of 2.

Other netizens took a different route by following the mathematical rule of PEMDAS strictly. They solved the parentheses, then divided 48 by 2, which yielded 24. They they multiplied 24 by 12, which gave the final answer of 288.

Wonder Girls’ Sunmi also tweeted about the above equation, “I thought it was 2, but some ppl said this and that about there needing to be a square bracket for the answer to be 2.. Hmm, is the answer 288… A smart person I know said it was 2..”

[Grandmaster TSE]

i wouldn't trust most pop stars with simple grade 2 math

[illicitstylz]

keep this shit on misc.

[Soundy]

I learned physics by watching the Roadrunner.

I refer to one of my favourite episodes where Wylie Coyote points an electric fan towards the sail on a boat he is on and it moves, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

As Bugs Bunny would say, "I know this doesn't follow the laws of physics, but I never studied law!"

My other favourite episode.........


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJJW7EF5aVk


I love the musical score



Hey, this post is about as relevant to real life as the equation that has, what, taken up 6 pages so far?
Classic Looney Tunes is the best ever - the whole sequence with the catapult and all the different ways it fails has me busting a gut every freakin' time I watch it.

I went to Bugs Bunny on Broadway at the Orpheum a couple years ago - where a real orchestra plays along with the cartoons. The conductor relates various stories, anecdotes and trivia along the way, and one of the best bits, for me, was the fact that the various directors (particularly, Friz Freling, Tex Avery, Bob McKimson, and of course, Chuck Jones) were in constant competition to come up with something funnier than the last guy.

Edit: here it is - good part starts at 3:58. I know every frame of this sequence and it still cracks me up watching it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ZyY9a6klM&feature=related

[Razor Ramon HG]

i wouldn't trust most pop stars with simple grade 2 math

She's more qualified than 99% of the members here.

That and I got 2 as well :lol

[jackal]

this shit is insane 6 pages.... the answer is 288 for the tards that think its 2 presto just explained it perfectly.



48 ÷ 2(9+3)
48 * ½(9+3)
48 * 6
=288

[blagh]

48 ÷ 2(9+3) = 48 ÷ 2(12) = 48 ÷ 24 = 2 CORRECT METHOD

48 ÷ 2(9+3) = 48 ÷ 2(12) = 48 ÷ 2 x 12 = 288 INCORRECT


48 ÷ 2(12) IS NOT THE SAME AS 48 ÷ 2 x 12
the brackets are there for a reason you cant just replace it with a "x"

[MG1]

Edit: here it is - good part starts at 3:58. I know every frame of this sequence and it still cracks me up watching it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ZyY9a6klM&feature=related

So hilarious. I remember Bugs Bunny Show was on every Saturday along with Disney on KVOS? Anyway, I would cry everytime my dad watched his HNIC. I hated hockey when I was little, 'cause it meant no cartoons. My dad wasn't home in the summer months, so that was a bonus. Of course later on, I started to play hockey and I started watching hockey with the old man. Dave Keon, ftmfw!!!

[drunkrussian]

math question and 5 pages in one day. asians, you so crazay!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[taylor192]

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).

Did you read what I wrote? The physics are far from easy. You have to design and build a conveyor belt capable of going to infinity in zero time, and account for the real world losses.

Mythbusters applied their own assumptions to the myth, since the myth makes no mention of what type of plane, conveyor belt, ... thus why we could debate this forever. The conveyor belt they designed, frankly, sucked, and had no hope of even keeping a car stationary, nevermind the plane.

[1exotic]

at the end of the day who gives a fuk nigga.

[Simplex123]

I cannot believe that this is 6 pages long.
ummm... 119 pages here:
http://niketalk.yuku.com/topic/294672/48-2-9-3

[illicitstylz]

ummm... 119 pages here:
http://niketalk.yuku.com/topic/294672/48-2-9-3

it's become a meme on bb.com misc forums LOL

[ntan]

48 ÷ 2(9+3) = 48 ÷ 2(12) = 48 ÷ 24 = 2 CORRECT METHOD

48 ÷ 2(9+3) = 48 ÷ 2(12) = 48 ÷ 2 x 12 = 288 INCORRECT


48 ÷ 2(12) IS NOT THE SAME AS 48 ÷ 2 x 12
the brackets are there for a reason you cant just replace it with a "x"

The brackets are there to evaluate the summation. Once the summation is complete (resulting in 12), it becomes a matter of how the individual perceives the associativity.

1) (48÷2) x 12
2) 48÷(2 x 12)

The issue is, division is non-associative, hence why everyone is up in arms and debating which is the correct answer.

If one however prioritizes distributivity before BEDMAS, the question becomes reformulated as:
48 ÷ (2 x 9 + 2 x 3) = 48 ÷ 24 = 2

[Nightwalker]

Where's the Stephen Hawking signal?

[Gt-R R34]

there is 1 thing this formula doing..

it's reigniting Math like it's 100 AD

[LUUUUUUUU]

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh187/cstyles45/Funneh/34fhe1v.gif

[Meowjin]

Does the equation take off?

[Oleophobic]

Why do a lot of people tend to group the 2(9+3) and treat it as ONE unit (ie. IMPLYING that there are brackets around it: [2(9+3)] )? I wasn't sure until I searched around Google for a few seconds and found that apparently it's called 'implied multiplication by juxtaposition'.

This phenomenon (the idea that implicit multiplication takes precedence over explicit) was brought about due to the practice of omitting the * operand next to variables/brackets when expressing multiplication.

lol learn something new every day (even though most of us have already been doing this without realizing it).

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/54341.html

similar type of ambiguous equation: ax/by

this pretty much sums it up and is pretty much what I (and some others) have stated:

So to answer your question, I think both answers can be considered
right - which means, of course, that the question itself is wrong. I
prefer the standard way (your first answer) when talking to students,
unless their own text gives the "implicit multiplication first" rule;
but in practice if I came across that expression, I would probably
first check where it came from to see if I could tell what was
intended. The main lesson to learn is not which rule to follow, but
how to avoid ambiguity in what you write yourself. Don't give other
people this kind of trouble.

[sdubfid]

This is from some bc teachers website

[Nightwalker]

That's how I was taught.

[PiuYi]

can someone PM me when this thing is settled and we have a definite answer? thanks.

[StylinRed]

i cant believe this has spawned 7 pages... jesus

[taylor192]

This is from some bc teachers website

Cool, good job finding that.

[ZenZa]

Ignoring the fact that this was a poorly written equation, when an equation is written as:

2(x+y)

I'd usually read the equation as (2x+2y) and this whole thing would be "brackets" for you bedmas lovers.

So 48/2(9+3) = 48/(18+6) = 48/(24) = 2

To me, it seems that to arrive at the answer of 288, the equation would have to look like this to me: (48/2) x (9+3).

It really depends on how you see this equation in your head.

[TOS'd]

48÷2(9+3) = No one cares. Let's move on.

[sundance1911]

Ignoring the fact that this was a poorly written equation, when an equation is written as:

2(x+y)

I'd usually read the equation as (2x+2y) and this whole thing would be "brackets" for you bedmas lovers.

So 48/2(9+3) = 48/(18+6) = 48/(24) = 2

To me, it seems that to arrive at the answer of 288, the equation would have to look like this to me: (48/2) x (9+3).

It really depends on how you see this equation in your head.


Zenza explained it right. Answer is 2

[CP.AR]

Just to make sure, I actually e-mailed one of my math professors today (disclaimer, this is a prof that knows me quite well, so no... i'm not an idiot):


> Thanks for your e-mail Terence,
> Now I am not actually sure if you are serious or not, maybe you are just a bit too
> stressed with exams and stuff coming up and you are in need of a joke. Oh well It's
> always fun to go back to the basics.
>
> Well we know that you always do algebra in the order as dictated by BEDMAS.
> Brackets, Exponents, Division, Multiplication, Addition, and Subtraction
> In this case, first we add 9 and 3, which equals 12
> now the entire thing becomes 48/2(12)
> You actually have two options for the next step. For simplicity, let's divide the 48 by
> 12 to get 4, leaving behind 4/2. Which I am sure you can figure out to be 2.
>
> So yes, your correct answer is 2.
>
> I'll see you in the exam on the 27th.
>
>
> Regards,
> ******
(he told me to hide his name because he didn't want a random google search to find him)

[shenmecar]

I hope your exam on the 27th will not be as hard as this fucking equation that spawned 7 pages of debate.

Heres how i see it

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y225/xTeddieZx/71b54b5a.jpg

[PiuYi]

Now I am not actually sure if you are serious or not, maybe you are just a bit too
stressed with exams and stuff coming up and you are in need of a joke. Oh well It's always fun to go back to the basics.

LOLOL

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2482/3811055786_b51d292cde.jpg

[johny]

let 9 = x and y = 3

48/2(x+y) = 24(x+Y) = (24x + 24y) = 288

or 48/2(x+y) = 48 / (2x+2y) = 48/ (18+6) = 2

needs more brackets...

my Ti 83 says 288...

[Razor Ramon HG]

Hmm, the more I read up on this, the more convinced I am that it's 288 and not 2.

[xilley]

for real? its 288

[CP.AR]

guys....

[CP.AR]

FUCK WE ALL GOT HARD TROLLED

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwpWw-iVKHc

[HonestTea]

288.

[k3mps]

I hope your exam on the 27th will not be as hard as this fucking equation that spawned 7 pages of debate.

Heres how i see it

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y225/xTeddieZx/71b54b5a.jpg

technically, all that work is an example of 48 / (2(9+3)), if you're dividing all of 2(9+3) by 48.

[TRDood]

this shit is insane 6 pages.... the answer is 288 for the tards that think its 2 presto just explained it perfectly.

He inversed only the parts he "wanted".
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[skiiipi]

we are not the only ones trying to figure this out

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=488334

apprently americans go by something called PEMDAS.....anyone here recieved an american education care to explain?

[TRDood]

Bracket matter. Try to take the natural log on both sides. See what you get. It really depends on how you look at the equation.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

No one liked my natural log approach? It suggests 288 though...

48/2(9+3)

ln(48)-ln(2)+ln(9+3) = ln(288)

So yes, 288 is the correct answer.

However, I still think it's bad form and I would say 2 is the correct answer if I didn't take the natural log.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[d1]

It's the same shit, Parentheses = Brackets

[StylinRed]

we are not the only ones trying to figure this out

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=488334

apprently americans go by something called PEMDAS.....anyone here recieved an american education care to explain?

there's no difference... pemdas bedmas etc etc etc its just a mnemonic

here


Mnemonics are often used to help students remember the rules, but the rules taught by the use of acronyms can be misleading. In Canada the acronym BEDMAS is common. It stands for Brackets, Exponents, Division, Multiplication, Addition, Subtraction. In other English speaking countries, Brackets may be called Parentheses, or symbols of inclusion and Exponentiation may be called either Indices, Powers or Orders, and since multiplication and division are of equal precedence, M and D are often interchanged, leading to such acronyms as BIMDAS, BODMAS, BOMDAS, BERDMAS, PERDMAS, PEMDAS, and BPODMAS.

These mnemonics may be misleading, especially if the user is not aware that multiplication and division are of equal precedence, as are addition and subtraction. Using any of the above rules in the order "addition first, subtraction afterward" would also give the wrong answer.

10 - 3 + 2 \,

The correct answer is 9, which is best understood by thinking of the problem as the sum of positive ten, negative three, and positive two.

10 + (-3) + 2 \,

There is a new mnemonic featured in Danica McKellar's books Math Doesn't Suck[2] and Kiss My Math[3] that does address this very issue: "Pandas Eat: Mustard on Dumplings, and Apples with Spice." The intention being that Mustard and Dumplings is a "dinner course" and that Apples and Spice is a "dessert course." Then it becomes not a linear string of operations to do one after the other, but rather the "dinner course" operations are considered together and performed left to right, and then addition and subtraction are considered together, again performed again left to right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations

http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/order_operations.html

http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/operations_exponents.html


How Do I Remember It All ... ? PEMDAS !

P
Parentheses first
E
Exponents (ie Powers and Square Roots, etc.)
MD
Multiplication and Division (left-to-right)
AS
Addition and Subtraction (left-to-right)

Divide and Multiply rank equally (and go left to right).

Add and Subtract rank equally (and go left to right)



After you have done "P" and "E", just go from left to right doing any "M" or "D" as you find them.

Then go from left to right doing any "A" or "S" as you find them.

Note: in the UK they say BODMAS (Brackets,Orders,Divide,Multiply,Add,Subtract), and in Canada they say BEDMAS (Brackets,Exponents,Divide,Multiply,Add,Subtract). It all means the same thing! It doesn't really matter how you remember it, just so long as you get it right.
http://www.mathsisfun.com/operation-order-pemdas.html

[SkinnyPupp]

This equation has become a fucking meme :lol

:thumbsup: to all the stupid people in the world for entertaining the rest of us

[MG1]

parenthesis = ( )
brackets = [ ]
braces = { }
angle brackets = < >

just splitting hairs

[StylinRed]

^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracket :D

[Presto]

Good morning. Looks like another slow work day, so here I am. How about some algebra?

The statement below is true.
48 ÷ 2(3+9) = 288

In order to demonstrate that it is so, I'll express 3+9 as 'x'.
48 ÷ 2(x) = 288

Now, following bedmas, I'll divide 48 by 2
24(x) = 288

To isolate the (x), I'll divide both sides by 24
x=12 = 3+9


Let's try the same thing but with an answer of 2
This time the statement below is false. 'x' =/= (3+9)
48 ÷ 2(3+9) = 2

In order to demonstrate that it is so, I'll express 3+9 as 'x'.
48 ÷ 2(x) = 2

Now, following bedmas, I'll divide 48 by 2
24x = 2

To isolate the (x), I'll divide both sides by 24
x = 1/12 (one-twelfth)
since we know that 'x' should be (3+9), then this statement is wrong..

[StylinRed]

^^ think its been settled a billion times already... with math instructional sites... but those that think its 2 will still think its 2

[Soundy]

Did you read what I wrote? The physics are far from easy. You have to design and build a conveyor belt capable of going to infinity in zero time, and account for the real world losses.

Okay: IN THE REAL WORLD, the physics are dead simple.

If you eliminate inertia and momentum, sure things change. You also have to eliminate friction, then, to keep it fair... and without friction in the wheel bearings, even a conveyor that instantly accelerates to infinite velocity wouldn't launch the plane backward. While we're at it, let's eliminate Newton altogether. Heck, let's recalculate it in a one-dimensional universe.
:failed:

[AzNightmare]

wow, can't believe this went to page 8...

[taylor192]

Okay: IN THE REAL WORLD, the physics are dead simple.

If you eliminate inertia and momentum, sure things change. You also have to eliminate friction, then, to keep it fair... and without friction in the wheel bearings, even a conveyor that instantly accelerates to infinite velocity wouldn't launch the plane backward. While we're at it, let's eliminate Newton altogether. Heck, let's recalculate it in a one-dimensional universe.
:failed:
:failed:

There's no momentum, cause the plane starts in a stationary position relative to the rest of the world, its only moving relative to the conveyor belt.

That's just one thing wrong with your post./ I can blow a few more holes in it, yet I won't cause its not worth it. Its a word problem, not a physics problem, since the real world implementation varies too much.

[Presto]

The conveyor belt is a red herring. It's all about the air being moved around the plane. Whether it's prop driven, or jet driven, it'll still move air. With thrust happening, Newton's 3rd law of motion says something is going to happen:

If a force acts upon a body, then an equal and opposite force must act upon the body that exerts the force.

Where's the opposing force of the engine going?

[Presto]

He inversed only the parts he "wanted".
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

Yeah.. it's some of that black, voodoo magic that I used to suit my purposes.

FACT: Division is the inverse of multiplication

So, instead of 4 ÷ 2, I can change the division operation into a multiplication operation by inverting the divisor(2), then I can multiply it. Now I have 4 * ½. And the answer is the same. I did this to bring a bit more clarity to the equation since people mistake the divide(÷) for a vinculum, and throws off their BEDMAS.

[46_valentinor]

Good morning. Looks like another slow work day, so here I am. How about some algebra?

The statement below is true.
48 ÷ 2(3+9) = 288

In order to demonstrate that it is so, I'll express 3+9 as 'x'.
48 ÷ 2(x) = 288

Now, following bedmas, I'll divide 48 by 2
24(x) = 288

To isolate the (x), I'll divide both sides by 24
x=12 = 3+9


Let's try the same thing but with an answer of 2
This time the statement below is false. 'x' =/= (3+9)
48 ÷ 2(3+9) = 2

In order to demonstrate that it is so, I'll express 3+9 as 'x'.
48 ÷ 2(x) = 2

Now, following bedmas, I'll divide 48 by 2
24x = 2

To isolate the (x), I'll divide both sides by 24
x = 1/12 (one-twelfth)
since we know that 'x' should be (3+9), then this statement is wrong..

the way you did 48 ÷ 2(x) = 2 is incorrect because if you recall, we treated 2(x) as one in order to get 2 as the final answer. it would be 2x and you would not have been able to divide 48 by 2x to get 24x. the correct way would have been:
48 2
___ = ___ which simplifies to 48 = 4x which equals to 12 = x

2x 1

however, the way you did 48 ÷ 2(x) = 288 is correct since you treated the 2(x) as 2*x which makes it possible for you to divide 48 by 2.

[ae101]

48÷2(9+3)= :
http://www.deviantart.com/download/129643029/It__s_Over_9000_by_Hellknight10.jpg
there its done, its over 9000

[Oleophobic]

....more useless proofs....


Stop with the proofs as they are meaningless seeing as this is an interpretation or better yet, a communication issue. (Ignore the folks trying to prove it's 2 by incorrectly using the B in BEDMAS).

To put it another way, we are taught to use / instead of the division symbol, and that division is really a fraction. So it really boils down to how people assume the question would look if it were written with an over / under division bar. As a fraction, there is ambiguity as I've mentioned earlier in one of my posts. :facepalm:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/words_that_end_in_gry.png

[Presto]

the way you did 48 ÷ 2(x) = 2 is incorrect because if you recall, we treated 2(x) as one in order to get 2 as the final answer. it would be 2x and you would not have been able to divide 48 by 2x to get 24x. the correct way would have been:
48 2
___ = ___ which simplifies to 48 = 4x which equals to 12 = x

2x 1

however, the way you did 48 ÷ 2(x) = 288 is correct since you treated the 2(x) as 2*x which makes it possible for you to divide 48 by 2.

2(x) = 2x = 2*x =/= (2x)
You're trying to put brackets around 2x which translates the original equation to: 48÷[2(9+3)]

:facepalm:

Multiplication is multiplication, and has the same priority as division. Ambiguity is when you introduce this implied multiplication as a priority, which is NOT standard convention. Some texts and calculators may do it, but it's not universally accepted, unlike BEDMAS.

The OP purposefully used a division(÷) sign, which I believe, is for clarity in dealing with an equation on one line. To properly express the equation as a fraction, it, again, needs to look like this:

48
__*(3+9)
2

NOT

48
__
2(3+9)


The fuckin' Rolls Royce is white, and the people that keep trying to thwart order of operations are wearing pink, Lady-Gaga glasses. Let me know when you decide to take them off, and you'll see the Rolls isn't pink.

[twitchyzero]

The fuckin' Rolls Royce is white, and the people that keep trying to thwart order of operations are wearing pink, Lady-Gaga glasses. Let me know when you decide to take them off, and you'll see the Rolls isn't pink.
Wow with the way Presto is going on about this you'd think we're pissing on his Doctorate of Mathematics paper.

You just keep proving Great68's point.

Anyways you can keep using endless amounts of facepalm emoticon for people coming up with answer of 2 but you'll still get both answers even from math majors/professors...FFS even calculators when the exact same equation is punched in as you pointed out.

[Presto]

Awesome. I'm not here to disprove his point, though. So, more power to you for being a great spectator.

[Grandmaster TSE]

we got ourselves some mathemagicians here

http://muddymaesuggins.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/mathematician.jpg?w=500&h=375

[blagh]

according to the poll atleast the majority of revscene arent fools

[JSilver]

SpuGen just trolled us all.

[cowabunka]

2

[Spy228]

lol, can't believe how many people are going to great length's to try and explain their incorrect answer of 2.

Do not pass go, do not collect $100÷2(5-1).


Stop with the proofs as they are meaningless seeing as this is an interpretation or better yet, a communication issue. (Ignore the folks trying to prove it's 2 by incorrectly using the B in BEDMAS).

To put it another way, we are taught to use / instead of the division symbol, and that division is really a fraction. So it really boils down to how people assume the question would look if it were written with an over / under division bar. As a fraction, there is ambiguity as I've mentioned earlier in one of my posts.

No, this is not an interpretation or a communication issue. You said this multiple times now. This is math, and there is only one way to read this. You can not assume additional brackets or w/e your fraction explanation is that doesn't make sense. Oh and btw, the point of proofs is to prove something, and that's exactly what they do. Just because you are not used to seeing it written in this form, does not make math function in a different way.

[cowabunka]

6(8) ÷ 2(12) = 2 or 288?

[LiquidTurbo]

Somebody lock this thread up. Haha.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[goo3]

Generally accepted by the internet:

48/2*(9+3) = 288
48/2(9+3) = ambiguous

/thread

[Mining]

2(x) = 2x = 2*x =/= (2x)
You're trying to put brackets around 2x which translates the original equation to: 48÷[2(9+3)]

:facepalm:

Multiplication is multiplication, and has the same priority as division. Ambiguity is when you introduce this implied multiplication as a priority, which is NOT standard convention. Some texts and calculators may do it, but it's not universally accepted, unlike BEDMAS.

The OP purposefully used a division(÷) sign, which I believe, is for clarity in dealing with an equation on one line. To properly express the equation as a fraction, it, again, needs to look like this:

48
__*(3+9)
2

NOT

48
__
2(3+9)


The fuckin' Rolls Royce is white, and the people that keep trying to thwart order of operations are wearing pink, Lady-Gaga glasses. Let me know when you decide to take them off, and you'll see the Rolls isn't pink.

Like I said before, D and M are interchangeable just as A and S are too.
Ever heard of PEMDAS?

you can write BEDMAS as, BEDMSA, BEMDAS, BEMDSA. they are all correct.

If you take this question to a math professor they will tell you both are correct answers depending on your interpretation (meaning its ambiguous)

[Spy228]

Like I said before, D and M are interchangeable just as A and S are too.
Ever heard of PEMDAS?

you can write BEDMAS as, BEDMSA, BEMDAS, BEMDSA. they are all correct.

You are correct, but then fail follow those rules correctly. The reason each pair is interchangeable is because neither operation has priority over each other. Therefore, the equation is calculated left to right. It is incorrect to start in the middle or right hand side of the equation just like it is incorrect to start reading an english word from the middle or right. Only one solution.

[StylinRed]

Like I said before, D and M are interchangeable just as A and S are too.
Ever heard of PEMDAS?

you can write BEDMAS as, BEDMSA, BEMDAS, BEMDSA. they are all correct.

If you take this question to a math professor they will tell you both are correct answers depending on your interpretation (meaning its ambiguous)

do people even read the thread.... this has been posted a dozen times already in the thread but i'll post the one i did on the last page again



Mnemonics are often used to help students remember the rules, but the rules taught by the use of acronyms can be misleading. In Canada the acronym BEDMAS is common. It stands for Brackets, Exponents, Division, Multiplication, Addition, Subtraction. In other English speaking countries, Brackets may be called Parentheses, or symbols of inclusion and Exponentiation may be called either Indices, Powers or Orders, and since multiplication and division are of equal precedence, M and D are often interchanged, leading to such acronyms as BIMDAS, BODMAS, BOMDAS, BERDMAS, PERDMAS, PEMDAS, and BPODMAS.

These mnemonics may be misleading, especially if the user is not aware that multiplication and division are of equal precedence, as are addition and subtraction. Using any of the above rules in the order "addition first, subtraction afterward" would also give the wrong answer.

10 - 3 + 2 \,

The correct answer is 9, which is best understood by thinking of the problem as the sum of positive ten, negative three, and positive two.

10 + (-3) + 2 \,

There is a new mnemonic featured in Danica McKellar's books Math Doesn't Suck[2] and Kiss My Math[3] that does address this very issue: "Pandas Eat: Mustard on Dumplings, and Apples with Spice." The intention being that Mustard and Dumplings is a "dinner course" and that Apples and Spice is a "dessert course." Then it becomes not a linear string of operations to do one after the other, but rather the "dinner course" operations are considered together and performed left to right, and then addition and subtraction are considered together, again performed again left to right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations

http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/order_operations.html

http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/operations_exponents.html


How Do I Remember It All ... ? PEMDAS !

P
Parentheses first
E
Exponents (ie Powers and Square Roots, etc.)
MD
Multiplication and Division (left-to-right)
AS
Addition and Subtraction (left-to-right)

Divide and Multiply rank equally (and go left to right).

Add and Subtract rank equally (and go left to right)



After you have done "P" and "E", just go from left to right doing any "M" or "D" as you find them.

Then go from left to right doing any "A" or "S" as you find them.

Note: in the UK they say BODMAS (Brackets,Orders,Divide,Multiply,Add,Subtract), and in Canada they say BEDMAS (Brackets,Exponents,Divide,Multiply,Add,Subtract). It all means the same thing! It doesn't really matter how you remember it, just so long as you get it right.
http://www.mathsisfun.com/operation-order-pemdas.html

[Soundy]

You are correct, but then fail follow those rules correctly. The reason each pair is interchangeable is because neither operation has priority over each other. Therefore, the equation is calculated left to right. It is incorrect to start in the middle or right hand side of the equation just like it is incorrect to start reading an english word from the middle or right. Only one solution.
This is the way we learned it in Algebra 10, 11, and 12, and Geometry 12, and Physics 11 and 12... granted that was over 25 years ago, but I don't recall hearing anything about the rules of mathematics changing since then.

[moomooCow]

You probably just missed the memo ;)

[!LittleDragon]

Fuck this shit, my answer's 420... I'll be outside

[Ching.Chong]

288.