Search results

Yes this is very rare but that's the whole point why people get confused and get 2 48÷2(9+3) =/= 48÷(2(9+3)) 48÷(2(9+3)) = 2 48÷2(9+3)= 288

Yes this is very rare but that's the whole point why people get confused and get 2 48÷2(9+3) =/= 48÷(2(9+3)) 48÷(2(9+3)) = 2 48÷2(9+3)= 288

kingcrux31 how would you write this down as a faction :  48÷(2(9+3)) ? 

kingcrux31 how would you write this down as a faction :  48÷(2(9+3)) ? 

first thing I thought of :

first thing I thought of :

                                                    48 If you got fraction like this    2(9+3) , you got to write it like that : 48: [2(9+3)]                                                                                                               48           9+3                          ...

                                                    48 If you got fraction like this    2(9+3) , you got to write it like that : 48: [2(9+3)]                                                                                                               48           9+3                          ...

Can you post link that confirm that it is true ? ... I am 100% sure you can't because no such thing exists. And following your theory, if there was 48 * 2(9+3) will it be imposible to split the 2 and write it 2 * 48(9+3) ? Because it should be imposible ...

Can you post link that confirm that it is true ? ... I am 100% sure you can't because no such thing exists. And following your theory, if there was 48 * 2(9+3) will it be imposible to split the 2 and write it 2 * 48(9+3) ? Because it should be imposible ...

Sorry didn't mean to offend you. But I can't see how you can disagree , I just posted link explaining order of operations: 1. first you do (9+3) 2. so you got 48÷2*12 thus first you divide and get : 24 * 12 , then you multiply... 

Sorry didn't mean to offend you. But I can't see how you can disagree , I just posted link explaining order of operations: 1. first you do (9+3) 2. so you got 48÷2*12 thus first you divide and get : 24 * 12 , then you multiply... 

Oh ... ok , but even if you admit that  1÷2 * (8+2) = 5  is correct, you still saying that 48÷2(9+3) does nat equal 288 ?  it is basicly the same thing Ok You're in Denial  , but i hope others will get it. It really is the right answer ... don't be fooled by my low post count 

Oh ... ok , but even if you admit that  1÷2 * (8+2) = 5  is correct, you still saying that 48÷2(9+3) does nat equal 288 ?  it is basicly the same thing Ok You're in Denial  , but i hope others will get it. It really is the right answer ... don't be fooled by my low post count 

No you don't need to put anything. There is order of opreations : http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa040502a.htm So first you do the 1:2 , then you multiply

No you don't need to put anything. There is order of opreations : http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa040502a.htm So first you do the 1:2 , then you multiply

Nah, just read what I posted, and apply your theory ... it will fail. Oh and 2(9+3) it is the same as 2*(9+3).

Nah, just read what I posted, and apply your theory ... it will fail. Oh and 2(9+3) it is the same as 2*(9+3).

Ok ... so how about this: You got simple 0,5 * 10 = 5 , cool ? ok ... In other words it's  1÷2 * 10 = 5 , right ? ... so you can say it is for instance 1÷2 * (8+2) = 5 ... yeah do the math (pun intended)

Ok ... so how about this: You got simple 0,5 * 10 = 5 , cool ? ok ... In other words it's  1÷2 * 10 = 5 , right ? ... so you can say it is for instance 1÷2 * (8+2) = 5 ... yeah do the math (pun intended)