48÷2(9+3) = ???

[snakeyes17]

Distribution = Multiplication. You are multiplying the inside numbers by the outside.
If you are doing this, you have to do division first.
48 divided by 2 is 24.
Then distribute that to the numbers inside
24(9+3) in which 9+3 would already be found to be 12.
That is the proper way to do it, and if you don't know what, then I don't know what to say.
Distributive Property works, but you still have to follow the order of operations.

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG

Turning the equation into a fraction would change it into a completely different equation altogether.
I will admit if the equation is a fraction, the answer would be 2. But as is? 288.

Exactly. Clearly the author knows how to use parenthesis, if they wanted to indicate THAT fraction all they had to do is add a parenthesis before the 2 and after the end parenthesis.

division problems are fractions, so im not sure as to how you think it changes. you're solving a multiplication problem by multiplying 48 halves and (9+3) when it clearly says to divide 48 by 2(9+3).

the division sign is the only sign in the problem, so im not sure why yall don't set it up as a classic division problem.

No. The only thing that is being divided is 48 by 2. If it was 2(9+3) it would all have to be contained within parentheses or brackets. This is basic in algebra.
You can't just assume that. It is not one term. I don't know what to tell you.

 

[omgitswes]

Originally Posted by Hyper

How the $%!* is this 95 pages, 

.

that's what I'm thinking too.

The answer is clearly 288, there's no other way around it.

 

[limitedretroog]

People, YOU DON'T NEED TO GET RID OF THE PARENTHESIS. Parenthesis and x are equivalent! Get that through your head!

 

[limitedretroog]

People, YOU DON'T NEED TO GET RID OF THE PARENTHESIS. Parenthesis and x are equivalent! Get that through your head!

 

[omgitswes]

Originally Posted by Hyper

How the $%!* is this 95 pages, 

.

that's what I'm thinking too.

The answer is clearly 288, there's no other way around it.

 

[jchambers]

Originally Posted by Streetballer23

I think it is 2. I been out of school for awhile, dont care to go back over what everyone said, I'm just wondering if its just different people teaching it. The way I learned would give me 2, but people learn different ways or are taught different ways. 93 pages, is just crazy. Agree to disagree.

You learned it wrong.

 

[jchambers]

Originally Posted by Streetballer23

I think it is 2. I been out of school for awhile, dont care to go back over what everyone said, I'm just wondering if its just different people teaching it. The way I learned would give me 2, but people learn different ways or are taught different ways. 93 pages, is just crazy. Agree to disagree.

You learned it wrong.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son


division problems are fractions, so im not sure as to how you think it changes. you're solving a multiplication problem by multiplying 48 halves and (9+3) when it clearly says to divide 48 by 2(9+3).

the division sign is the only sign in the problem, so im not sure why yall don't set it up as a classic division problem.

You are implying that juxtaposition overrides order of operation like I said show me a math problem that proves this.

in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son


division problems are fractions, so im not sure as to how you think it changes. you're solving a multiplication problem by multiplying 48 halves and (9+3) when it clearly says to divide 48 by 2(9+3).

the division sign is the only sign in the problem, so im not sure why yall don't set it up as a classic division problem.

You are implying that juxtaposition overrides order of operation like I said show me a math problem that proves this.

in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

 

[eff ecks]

this is the dumbest thread EVER!

 

[eff ecks]

this is the dumbest thread EVER!

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Problems b and n

10 x 2 (2+3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check)

4(16/2) x2(15/3) = (64 /

x (30 / 6 ) =  does not apply it only applies when it is distribute over addition and subtraction

You realize you MUST solve whats in the parenthesis first before trying to distribute right?

What are you talking about. I distributed the 2 to the 2 and 3. how about this to make it easier


10 x 2 (2+3)  = 10 x ( 2*2 + 2*3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check again)

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Problems b and n

10 x 2 (2+3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check)

4(16/2) x2(15/3) = (64 /

x (30 / 6 ) =  does not apply it only applies when it is distribute over addition and subtraction

You realize you MUST solve whats in the parenthesis first before trying to distribute right?

What are you talking about. I distributed the 2 to the 2 and 3. how about this to make it easier


10 x 2 (2+3)  = 10 x ( 2*2 + 2*3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check again)

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by yungchris504

10 x 2 (2+3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check)

4(16/2) x2(15/3) = (64 /

x (30 / 6 ) =  does not apply it only applies when it is distribute over addition and subtraction

You realize you MUST solve whats in the parenthesis first before trying to distribute right?

What are you talking about. I distributed the 2 to the 2 and 3. how about this to make it easier


10 x 2 (2+3)  = 10 x ( 2*2 + 2*3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check again)

So now distribution goes before solving whats in the parenthesis?

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by yungchris504

10 x 2 (2+3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check)

4(16/2) x2(15/3) = (64 /

x (30 / 6 ) =  does not apply it only applies when it is distribute over addition and subtraction

You realize you MUST solve whats in the parenthesis first before trying to distribute right?

What are you talking about. I distributed the 2 to the 2 and 3. how about this to make it easier


10 x 2 (2+3)  = 10 x ( 2*2 + 2*3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check again)

So now distribution goes before solving whats in the parenthesis?

 

[nash]

there is no smiley to express how ridiculous it is that this is 95 pages

 

[nash]

there is no smiley to express how ridiculous it is that this is 95 pages

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

You are implying that juxtaposition overrides order of operation like I said show me a math problem that proves this.

in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

horizontal lines for fractions are division tho. the fraction of 1/4 is 1 divided by 4.

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

You are implying that juxtaposition overrides order of operation like I said show me a math problem that proves this.

in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

horizontal lines for fractions are division tho. the fraction of 1/4 is 1 divided by 4.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son


in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

horizontal lines for fractions are division tho. the fraction of 1/4 is 1 divided by 4.

You do realize the horizontal line clearly adds parenthesis on terms? With the horizontal line it is (1)/(4) just like if you were going to do this problem it would be (4/(2(9+3))

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son


in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

horizontal lines for fractions are division tho. the fraction of 1/4 is 1 divided by 4.

You do realize the horizontal line clearly adds parenthesis on terms? With the horizontal line it is (1)/(4) just like if you were going to do this problem it would be (4/(2(9+3))

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

You realize you MUST solve whats in the parenthesis first before trying to distribute right?

What are you talking about. I distributed the 2 to the 2 and 3. how about this to make it easier


10 x 2 (2+3)  = 10 x ( 2*2 + 2*3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check again)

So now distribution goes before solving whats in the parenthesis?

What are you talking about?

I am not sure if you know that when you see communitive property with multiplication it always means distribution. The only time that isn't the case is if it is division inside the parenthesis or multiplication.

It does not matter the order (in this particular problem that has both communitive and distributive properties) I solve the problem it only matters that the answer is correct which I proved to you.

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

You realize you MUST solve whats in the parenthesis first before trying to distribute right?

What are you talking about. I distributed the 2 to the 2 and 3. how about this to make it easier


10 x 2 (2+3)  = 10 x ( 2*2 + 2*3) = 10 x ( 4 +6)  = 10 x 10 = 100 (check again)

So now distribution goes before solving whats in the parenthesis?

What are you talking about?

I am not sure if you know that when you see communitive property with multiplication it always means distribution. The only time that isn't the case is if it is division inside the parenthesis or multiplication.

It does not matter the order (in this particular problem that has both communitive and distributive properties) I solve the problem it only matters that the answer is correct which I proved to you.

 

[limitedretroog]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

You are implying that juxtaposition overrides order of operation like I said show me a math problem that proves this.

in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

horizontal lines for fractions are division tho. the fraction of 1/4 is 1 divided by 4.

I already explained this:

Because if it's a fraction, you solve both different ways.
Fraction: solve denominator first, divide by numerator.
As is: Order of operations, parentheses, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right) in that order.
Solving the equation any other way would just be completely ignoring the rules altogether and just making up your own.

 

[limitedretroog]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

You are implying that juxtaposition overrides order of operation like I said show me a math problem that proves this.

in a division problem you have a÷b in a multiplication problem you have a*b. you're implying a multiplication when there's already a division sign. don't make it harder than it is

a= 48
b= 2(9+3)

so your saying 1/4*3 is really 1 over 4 times 3? proof to support this claim? Your essentially saying that the division symbol ALWAYS indicates a fraction which is not true at all. If that would be the case why even have the horizontal line for a fraction?

horizontal lines for fractions are division tho. the fraction of 1/4 is 1 divided by 4.

I already explained this:

Because if it's a fraction, you solve both different ways.
Fraction: solve denominator first, divide by numerator.
As is: Order of operations, parentheses, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right) in that order.
Solving the equation any other way would just be completely ignoring the rules altogether and just making up your own.