48÷2(9+3) = ???

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

You're wrong because both 2*9 and 2*3 should be in one set of ( ) in this problem. Not two.

Not it shouldnt check 2nd example. The distributive property dosent create one term it creates 2. Stop trying to argue against sources when you cant provide your own.

2nd example: http://www.algebra-class....-property-equations.html

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

 

[balloonoboy]

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

The equation originally read 48÷(18+6) or 48÷18+6. The 2 was factored out by some idiot who got the internets going wild.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

 

[balloonoboy]

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

The equation originally read 48÷(18+6) or 48÷18+6. The 2 was factored out by some idiot who got the internets going wild.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Not it shouldnt check 2nd example. The distributive property dosent create one term it creates 2. Stop trying to argue against sources when you cant provide your own.

2nd example: http://www.algebra-class....-property-equations.html

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

If the parenthesis are kept it is implied that it is multiplied by 1 hence
if he would have did this

2x - 1 * (6x-9) + 4 = 33

it is still right

the coefficient would be 1 in this case or 3 had he factored out the the 3 from the 6 and 9

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Not it shouldnt check 2nd example. The distributive property dosent create one term it creates 2. Stop trying to argue against sources when you cant provide your own.

2nd example: http://www.algebra-class....-property-equations.html

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

If the parenthesis are kept it is implied that it is multiplied by 1 hence
if he would have did this

2x - 1 * (6x-9) + 4 = 33

it is still right

the coefficient would be 1 in this case or 3 had he factored out the the 3 from the 6 and 9

 

[kingcrux31]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Not it shouldnt check 2nd example. The distributive property dosent create one term it creates 2. Stop trying to argue against sources when you cant provide your own.

2nd example: http://www.algebra-class....-property-equations.html

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

If the parenthesis are kept it is implied that it is multiplied by 1 hence
if he would have did this

2x - 1 x (6x-9) + 4 = 33

it is still right

What happens when you multiply 1 by (6x-9)? it turns into 6x - 9 NO PARENTHESIS at all. Distributive property REMOVES THEM. Like I said prove me wrong and find a source that does otherwise.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

If the parenthesis are kept it is implied that it is multiplied by 1 hence
if he would have did this

2x - 1 x (6x-9) + 4 = 33

it is still right

What happens when you multiply 1 by (6x-9)? it turns into 6x - 9 NO PARENTHESIS at all. Distributive property REMOVES THEM. Like I said prove me wrong and find a source that does otherwise.

 

[kingcrux31]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Not it shouldnt check 2nd example. The distributive property dosent create one term it creates 2. Stop trying to argue against sources when you cant provide your own.

2nd example: http://www.algebra-class....-property-equations.html

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

50/2(1-1)
50/2(0)
25(0)

0

Its so disgusting that your a mod. You wont even admit you dont even know how to use the distributive property. Admit you were wrong trying to distribute in this problem.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

The link you provided showed 6 * 2 + 6 * 4x, which is the same as (6 * 2 + 6 * 4x), not (6 * 2) + (6 * 4x). Looks all the same until it's preceded by another sign.
So, yeah. You're definitely wrong.

What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

50/2(1-1)
50/2(0)
25(0)

0

Its so disgusting that your a mod. You wont even admit you dont even know how to use the distributive property. Admit you were wrong trying to distribute in this problem.

 

[balloonoboy]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

You're not following. I know you stubborn AF but listen for once.

You may think "taking care of the parenthesis" means to add the two terms inside but that's false. Mainly because you have to account for the coefficient 2 somehow. And since it was the 2 that brought the two terms together in the first place. You just can't add them; you HAVE to distribute.

So now I'm certain it's not 288. Only 2 or 8.6.

The equation originally read 48÷(18+6) or 48÷18+6.

 

[balloonoboy]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

You're not following. I know you stubborn AF but listen for once.

You may think "taking care of the parenthesis" means to add the two terms inside but that's false. Mainly because you have to account for the coefficient 2 somehow. And since it was the 2 that brought the two terms together in the first place. You just can't add them; you HAVE to distribute.

So now I'm certain it's not 288. Only 2 or 8.6.

The equation originally read 48÷(18+6) or 48÷18+6.

 

[kingcrux31]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast


What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

50/2(1-1)
50/2(0)
25(0)

0

Its so disgusting that your a mod. You wont even admit you dont even know how to use the distributive property. Admit you were wrong trying to distribute in this problem.

The answer is UNDEFINED. 

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

You're not following. I know you stubborn AF but listen for once.

You may think "taking care of the parenthesis means to add the two terms inside but that's false. Mainly because you have to account for the coefficient 2 somehow. And since it was the 2 that brought the two terms together in the first place. You just can't add.

So you are saying to distribute then?
Which like i said leads to
48/(2*9) + (2*3)
that does not give you 2.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

You're not following. I know you stubborn AF but listen for once.

You may think "taking care of the parenthesis means to add the two terms inside but that's false. Mainly because you have to account for the coefficient 2 somehow. And since it was the 2 that brought the two terms together in the first place. You just can't add.

So you are saying to distribute then?
Which like i said leads to
48/(2*9) + (2*3)
that does not give you 2.

 

[kingcrux31]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast


What are you talking about?

Look how they solved the question. If it was supposed to have parenthesis they would of finished it off with the invisible parenthesis you put around it. Your wrong dude.

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

50/2(1-1)
50/2(0)
25(0)

0

Its so disgusting that your a mod. You wont even admit you dont even know how to use the distributive property. Admit you were wrong trying to distribute in this problem.

The answer is UNDEFINED. 

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

50/2(1-1)
50/2(0)
25(0)

0

Its so disgusting that your a mod. You wont even admit you dont even know how to use the distributive property. Admit you were wrong trying to distribute in this problem.

The answer is UNDEFINED. 

explain. Look at you though still wont say anything about the distributive comment though.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

That's a different problem from what was posted and doesn't include division. Here, answer this quick in your head 50÷2(1-1) =???
[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Don't tell me your answer is 25 or 0 because if so 

[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]
[/font]

50/2(1-1)
50/2(0)
25(0)

0

Its so disgusting that your a mod. You wont even admit you dont even know how to use the distributive property. Admit you were wrong trying to distribute in this problem.

The answer is UNDEFINED. 

explain. Look at you though still wont say anything about the distributive comment though.

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

And therein lies the problem folks.

Do we do PEMDAS straight out?

Do we distribute first? If so, is each distribution given it's own set of parenthesis or are they grouped together. If the former, do we wait to add the distributed products until we get to the addition step?

I agree. Whoever created this problem knew this. 

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

And therein lies the problem folks.

Do we do PEMDAS straight out?

Do we distribute first? If so, is each distribution given it's own set of parenthesis or are they grouped together. If the former, do we wait to add the distributed products until we get to the addition step?

I agree. Whoever created this problem knew this. 

 

[balloonoboy]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

You're not following. I know you stubborn AF but listen for once.

You may think "taking care of the parenthesis" means to add the two terms inside but that's false. Mainly because you have to account for the coefficient 2 somehow. And since it was the 2 that brought the two terms together in the first place. You just can't add them; you HAVE to distribute.

So now I'm certain it's not 288. Only 2 or 8.6.

The equation originally read 48÷(18+6) or 48÷18+6.

Edited

 

[balloonoboy]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Why would you make 9+3=12 when distribution is just unfactoring the coefficient? And that is how to take care of the parenthesis.

Let me repeat, the 2 was originally part of the 9 and 3 before being factored out. Take care of the parenthesis by unfactoring or distribution.

Quick google searches won't work here, b. Either you know it or you don't.

You have to make the 9+3 because you have to do whats in the parenthesis first before moving on. You are taking care of the parenthesis by simplifying the problem.

You're not following. I know you stubborn AF but listen for once.

You may think "taking care of the parenthesis" means to add the two terms inside but that's false. Mainly because you have to account for the coefficient 2 somehow. And since it was the 2 that brought the two terms together in the first place. You just can't add them; you HAVE to distribute.

So now I'm certain it's not 288. Only 2 or 8.6.

The equation originally read 48÷(18+6) or 48÷18+6.

Edited