48÷2(9+3) = ????

48÷2(9+3)

  • 288

    Votes: 127 43.6%

  • 2

    Votes: 152 52.2%

  • idunnololdog.jpg

    Votes: 12 4.1%
  • Total voters
    291
48÷2(9+3)

I don't blame anyone for arriving at 2 (the latter interpretation) because division in the real world almost always separates the numerator from the denominator. Order of operations is pedantic. It's like writing the rules for a parser. But the onus is still on the expression-writer to make the expression as readable as possible.

mEdNC.png
 


Since this thread is still active..
Chianti said:
> If it was all meant to be under the denominator it should be written that way

I agree that it could be more explicitly written, but even if it wasn't, I'd still do
the same thing.

Firstly because I would never rewrite 48/12a as:

48 * 12
--
a

but secondly here's another way to look at it:
With the expression 48/a(9+3) BIDMAS says brackets first.
But that a is part of the bracketed expression.
It means: (a*9 + a*3) which equals 12a

Likewise, 2(9+3) means (2*9 + 2*3) which equals 24
Even following BIDMAS to the letter, the answer is 48/24 = 2
Click to expand...
That's how I looked at it, 2(9+3) has to be distributed and simplified first. It's all basic math everyone knows how to perform, the question is just poorly formed (on purpose to get people fired up).
 
The answer is 288.

I understand where some confusion is coming from, but in mathematics there is only 1 valid answer to an expression. BODMAS/PEMDAS > the juxtaposition argument.
 
Multiplication by juxtaposition takes precedence over division in the order of operations... just sayin

The Order of Operations: More Examples

This next example displays an issue that almost never arises but, when it does, there seems to be no end to the arguing.

  • Simplify 16 ÷ 2[8 – 3(4 – 2)] + 1.
    • 16 ÷ 2[8 – 3(4 – 2)] + 1
      = 16 ÷ 2[8 – 3(2)] + 1
      = 16 ÷ 2[8 – 6] + 1
      = 16 ÷ 2[2] + 1       (**) = 16 ÷ 4 + 1
      = 4 + 1
      =       5
The confusing part in the above calculation is how "16 divided by 2[2] + 1" (in the line marked with the double-star) becomes "16 divided by 4 + 1", instead of "8 times by 2 + 1". That's because, even though multiplication and division are at the same level (so the left-to-right rule should apply), parentheses outrank division, so the first 2 goes with the [2], rather than with the "16 divided by". That is, multiplication that is indicated by placement against parentheses (or brackets, etc) is "stronger" than "regular" multiplication.
 
48/2(3+9) Original equation (I'm using PEMDAS for this)
48/2(12) (Parentheses first)
24(12) (Left -> Right Multiplication and Division)
A : 288 Multiply

But honestly I'm not sure anymore since some of the people who chose 2 have good points... I'll show it to my old Geometry teacher tomorrow and see what she says.
 
Nobody that is saying the answer is 288 has answered this question yet:

What does 10y/5y equal?

(or 10x/5x, or 4x/2x, it's been asked a few different ways)
 
DreamMachine said:
Nobody that is saying the answer is 288 has answered this question yet:

What does 10y/5y equal?

(or 10x/5x, or 4x/2x, it's been asked a few different ways)
Click to expand...

Not sure why I'm taking the bait on these trolls. Nothing better to do at the moment I guess.

The question you are asking does not make sense. An equation consists of an expression on each side of the equals sign. You only provided half the equation.
 
Ok if you starting throwing out shit like BEDMAS, BODMAS, PEMDAS, DUMBASS, BDSM or whatever fucking rule you want to apply, get out of 3rd grade. Everyone with quarter brain knows the order of operations.


Don't fucking tell me that i need to write shit like 1/2x like 1/(2x) so you will not think 1/2x= 1/2*x= x/2 LOL

Can you imagine with something more complex then OP question how many parenthesis and brackets you will have to add? You will not be able to read that shit. Maybe you did not see something more complex so you don't understand, I see.

Like to someone with intellect above average 2 comes naturally just by looking at it and that is fucking difference.

So to end it here: everyone puts 2 or 288 in their signature and so people with 2 will buy services from people with 2 only, unless it's some shit that not invloves math like design or copywriting. /end mothefucking thread
 
SeoReborn said:
No the rules of algebra always applies, the answer to the main question is 2. I got side tracked by the link i posted.

The mistake you are making is that you are assuming (if * is taken as multiplication)

48÷2(9+3) = 48÷2*(9+3)

This is not true. Here are the different answers:

48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(18+6) = 48÷(24) = 2

48÷2*(9+3) = 24*(9+3) = 24*(12) = 288

with 2(9+3), 2 is attached to the bracket, so 2(9+3) is treated as one value.

with 2*(9+3), 2 is not attached to the bracket, so 2*(9+3) is not treated as one value hence subjected to proceeding operators.
Click to expand...

I just explained it in a prior post to oknetwork on why it's not true. Just because you see it in algebra does not make it a RULE, and that logic is flawed and it doesn't align with mathematics in general. They make it EASIER on us when we use the distributive rule and associative rule of multiplication, but they are not RULES that we must follow throughout all mathematics. 2(9+3) and 2 * (9+3) are exactly the same.

I'll reiterate it: the only reason why you're multiplying it next to the bracket is because you're use to operating on values within one term, and you rarely (if ever) see problems stated like 48/2(9+3) in algebra. All of the problems that you've dealt with in algebra have problems that are simplified correctly to avoid nonsense like this. You're still separating the problem into 2 terms. If not, you see the / as a fraction line.

48 and /2(or 0.5 or (1/2)) are essentially factors (keep in mind, we're only in ONE TERM) within that term.

Why are people assuming that some of the tools of algebra are laws that we must follow in ALL of mathematics?

EDIT: fuck it. I'm out of this thread.
 
mikecarquote said:
Not sure why I'm taking the bait on these trolls. Nothing better to do at the moment I guess.

The question you are asking does not make sense. An equation consists of an expression on each side of the equals sign. You only provided half the equation.
Click to expand...

Dude, his question makes perfect sense. He is not showing an equation he is asking a question.

dooogen said:
10y/5y = 2

10y/5(y) = 2x^2
Click to expand...

That is some illogical shit right there

First let me clarify

10y/5y=2 right?

ok so 10y/5y IS 10*y/5*y (according to the same logic as you are putting on the OPs equation)

so now following the order of operations the answer is NOT 2 it's 2x^2, which is clearly wrong

therefore, according to this logic, Juxtaposition (being beside something for those who don't know what it means) must take precedence and the only correct way to re-write the expression is (10*y)/(5*y), and now when you use the order of operations the answer is 2, which is correct.

Secondly

There is NO difference between 10y/5(y) and 10y/5y in terms of what it means, if you don't believe me then write them both out in their long form using the same notation you did when you expanded the original notation i.e. 5(y) = 5*y, they both equal 10*y/5*y according to this logic

They are EXACTLY the same thing.

Therefore I think that this proves that juxtaposition does take precedence over division. But I would love to get the take of someone who understands Maths to tell me where the flaw in this is.
 
What about taking the ÷2 as a *0.5? Would anyone disagree with that, and why? Both ways the answer is 288.

vo7akz.jpg
 
Hey everyone... I don't get it. Could somebody please take e through this step by step?

...

In all seriousness, read the rest of the thread before you rehash the same goddamn shit. I'm tired of seeing people do the same 4 math steps again and again thinking that they're proving something new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom