48÷2(9+3) = ???

[dland24]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by MJair

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

Holdenmichael... your jargon is incorrect. Once everyone goes to school Monday the math teachers will prove the answer if two. The question is asking you to multiple 2 time 12, then divide by 24.

Pmdas. Parenthesis 1st, multiplication 2nd, divison 3rd.

P first. (9 plus 3)
M next 2 X 12
D follows. 48/24

For the last time Multiplication does not come before Division.

Yeah, this post pretty much crushes Team 288's argument. Without their "Multiplication is before Division" argument, they really have nothing. The question is also written with a ÷, so either we chalk this up as an "Idk which sign they're using so it could go either way," or team 2 all out wins. /thread

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by MJair

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

Holdenmichael... your jargon is incorrect. Once everyone goes to school Monday the math teachers will prove the answer if two. The question is asking you to multiple 2 time 12, then divide by 24.

Pmdas. Parenthesis 1st, multiplication 2nd, divison 3rd.

P first. (9 plus 3)
M next 2 X 12
D follows. 48/24

For the last time Multiplication does not come before Division.

Yeah, this post pretty much crushes Team 288's argument. Without their "Multiplication is before Division" argument, they really have nothing. The question is also written with a ÷, so either we chalk this up as an "Idk which sign they're using so it could go either way," or team 2 all out wins. /thread

 

[bruce negro]

Originally Posted by dland24

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by MJair

For the last time Multiplication does not come before Division.

Yeah, this post pretty much crushes Team 288's argument. Without their "Multiplication is before Division" argument, they really have nothing. The question is also written with a ÷, so either we chalk this up as an "Idk which sign they're using so it could go either way," or team 2 all out wins. /thread

Explain?

 

[bruce negro]

Originally Posted by dland24

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by MJair

For the last time Multiplication does not come before Division.

Yeah, this post pretty much crushes Team 288's argument. Without their "Multiplication is before Division" argument, they really have nothing. The question is also written with a ÷, so either we chalk this up as an "Idk which sign they're using so it could go either way," or team 2 all out wins. /thread

Explain?

 

[nermindee]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by dland24

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Yeah, this post pretty much crushes Team 288's argument. Without their "Multiplication is before Division" argument, they really have nothing. The question is also written with a ÷, so either we chalk this up as an "Idk which sign they're using so it could go either way," or team 2 all out wins. /thread

Explain?

SMH... you owned yourself twice by asking for an explanation

 

[dland24]

Nothing to explain bro. The multiplication before division argument is the argument of people who answered 2, not 288. 

 

[nermindee]

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Originally Posted by dland24

Originally Posted by bruce negro

Yeah, this post pretty much crushes Team 288's argument. Without their "Multiplication is before Division" argument, they really have nothing. The question is also written with a ÷, so either we chalk this up as an "Idk which sign they're using so it could go either way," or team 2 all out wins. /thread

Explain?

SMH... you owned yourself twice by asking for an explanation

 

[dland24]

Nothing to explain bro. The multiplication before division argument is the argument of people who answered 2, not 288. 

 

[ncmalko1]

The ENTIRE parenthesis equation needs to be worked out first, not just the addition inside the parenthesis. That's where the 288 people are wrong. You don't just add 9 plus 3 and leave. You must factor the entire parenthesis equation which is 2(9 plus 3)

 

[ncmalko1]

The ENTIRE parenthesis equation needs to be worked out first, not just the addition inside the parenthesis. That's where the 288 people are wrong. You don't just add 9 plus 3 and leave. You must factor the entire parenthesis equation which is 2(9 plus 3)

 

[bruce negro]

Originally Posted by dland24

Nothing to explain bro. The multiplication before division argument is the argument of people who answered 2, not 288. 

No, I'm pretty sure the one that you guys couldn't refute was the use of the distributive property. I quoted someone's explanation of it a couple of times as to how it gives you 2, but no one has been able to refute it yet. We're also arguing that you multiply because of the parentheses, not because it's just a normal multiplication. Look at the juxtaposition argument a few pages back, it shows that it's not just multiplication, which, like shown above, is interchangeable with division. You guys are the ones who owned yourselves.

Edit: Wait, so have you guys been thinking that we thought the 2(12) was just normal multiplication? Is that what it really comes down to? Have you guys actually been reading ANY of our arguments in which we have said otherwise?

 

[bruce negro]

Originally Posted by dland24

Nothing to explain bro. The multiplication before division argument is the argument of people who answered 2, not 288. 

No, I'm pretty sure the one that you guys couldn't refute was the use of the distributive property. I quoted someone's explanation of it a couple of times as to how it gives you 2, but no one has been able to refute it yet. We're also arguing that you multiply because of the parentheses, not because it's just a normal multiplication. Look at the juxtaposition argument a few pages back, it shows that it's not just multiplication, which, like shown above, is interchangeable with division. You guys are the ones who owned yourselves.

Edit: Wait, so have you guys been thinking that we thought the 2(12) was just normal multiplication? Is that what it really comes down to? Have you guys actually been reading ANY of our arguments in which we have said otherwise?

 

[holdenmichael]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

You do the paranthesis equation first which is.........

2(9 plus 3) which is 24
48/24


You don't do the parethesis addition only
48/2 x 12

The entire parenthesis formula is completed first. That is why the answer is 2

Again, this is only true if you view "/" exclusively as a symbol for division.  I'd also like to add that whether or not you complete the work inside the parentheses [FYI, parenthesis is the singular; ie. "(" or ")," not "()." That's why "(" is known as an open parenthesis and ")" is known as a closed parenthesis] first is irrelevant because of the distributive property*.  What is relevant is whether or not "/" is used exclusively as a symbol for fraction or interchangeably as a symbol for both fraction and division.

* here's the explanation for this:

We can view the equation as:

48/2(9) + 48/2(3)=288, if "/" is a symbol for fraction

We can view the equation as:

48/2(9)+2(3) --> 48/18+6 --> 48/24=2 if "/" is a symbol for division.

As you can see, what's relevant is not completing the work inside the parentheses first, it's deciding whether or not "/" is being used as a symbol for fraction or division.

Again, the equation at the root of this thread isn't 48/2(9+3)=, it's 48÷2(9+3)=, in which the answer can only be 2 because ÷ cannot be interpreted as a symbol for fraction.

 

[holdenmichael]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

You do the paranthesis equation first which is.........

2(9 plus 3) which is 24
48/24


You don't do the parethesis addition only
48/2 x 12

The entire parenthesis formula is completed first. That is why the answer is 2

Again, this is only true if you view "/" exclusively as a symbol for division.  I'd also like to add that whether or not you complete the work inside the parentheses [FYI, parenthesis is the singular; ie. "(" or ")," not "()." That's why "(" is known as an open parenthesis and ")" is known as a closed parenthesis] first is irrelevant because of the distributive property*.  What is relevant is whether or not "/" is used exclusively as a symbol for fraction or interchangeably as a symbol for both fraction and division.

* here's the explanation for this:

We can view the equation as:

48/2(9) + 48/2(3)=288, if "/" is a symbol for fraction

We can view the equation as:

48/2(9)+2(3) --> 48/18+6 --> 48/24=2 if "/" is a symbol for division.

As you can see, what's relevant is not completing the work inside the parentheses first, it's deciding whether or not "/" is being used as a symbol for fraction or division.

Again, the equation at the root of this thread isn't 48/2(9+3)=, it's 48÷2(9+3)=, in which the answer can only be 2 because ÷ cannot be interpreted as a symbol for fraction.

 

[ncmalko1]

Yep the 288 people are wrong. What's funny is the flung the most insults too.

 

[ncmalko1]

Yep the 288 people are wrong. What's funny is the flung the most insults too.

 

[sole vintage]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

 You don't just add 9 plus 3 and leave. You must factor the entire parenthesis equation which is 2(9 plus 3)

THIS

2(9+3) counts as a single term

 

[hybridsoldier23]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

The ENTIRE parenthesis equation needs to be worked out first, not just the addition inside the parenthesis. That's where the 288 people are wrong. You don't just add 9 plus 3 and leave. You must factor the entire parenthesis equation which is 2(9 plus 3)

As a stickler I'm saying that there SHOULD be brackets around [2(9+3 . You can say they're implied because they're "part of the denominator" but they're not there in the original posted equation. I'm sticking behind my opinion a few pages back that we have no idea how this was intended to be written. Is the 2 part of the denominator?

The general consensus among math people is that "multiplication by juxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next to each other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations. But not all software is programmed this way, and sometimes teachers view things differently. If in doubt, ask!
The "2" side keeps quoting this and while one person posted it somewhere that doesn't make it the end all be all. In fact it says that there's a differing in opinion and it can be viewed differently.

This whole this has been one of the greatest trolls launched upon the net that I can recall. This question has popped up all over the place and I'm sure we will get differing opinions from various college professors on Monday (with videos) spouting off everywhere from Cal Tech to D-bag state claiming they're right.

I stand by my own personal opinion that the question is poorly or lazily written and 2 or 288 can be legitimately right depending on the interpretation. That it all depends on what the actual meaning behind the statement was, since math statements (in the real world) don't exist on their own.

 

[hybridsoldier23]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

The ENTIRE parenthesis equation needs to be worked out first, not just the addition inside the parenthesis. That's where the 288 people are wrong. You don't just add 9 plus 3 and leave. You must factor the entire parenthesis equation which is 2(9 plus 3)

As a stickler I'm saying that there SHOULD be brackets around [2(9+3 . You can say they're implied because they're "part of the denominator" but they're not there in the original posted equation. I'm sticking behind my opinion a few pages back that we have no idea how this was intended to be written. Is the 2 part of the denominator?

The general consensus among math people is that "multiplication by juxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next to each other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations. But not all software is programmed this way, and sometimes teachers view things differently. If in doubt, ask!
The "2" side keeps quoting this and while one person posted it somewhere that doesn't make it the end all be all. In fact it says that there's a differing in opinion and it can be viewed differently.

This whole this has been one of the greatest trolls launched upon the net that I can recall. This question has popped up all over the place and I'm sure we will get differing opinions from various college professors on Monday (with videos) spouting off everywhere from Cal Tech to D-bag state claiming they're right.

I stand by my own personal opinion that the question is poorly or lazily written and 2 or 288 can be legitimately right depending on the interpretation. That it all depends on what the actual meaning behind the statement was, since math statements (in the real world) don't exist on their own.

 

[sole vintage]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

 You don't just add 9 plus 3 and leave. You must factor the entire parenthesis equation which is 2(9 plus 3)

THIS

2(9+3) counts as a single term

 

[240Zestways]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

You do the paranthesis equation first which is.........

2(9 plus 3) which is 24
48/24


You don't do the parethesis addition only
48/2 x 12

The entire parenthesis formula is completed first. That is why the answer is 2

You do know the 2 is outside of the parenthesis right? The first rule only applies to things INSIDE of the parenthesis.
2(9+3) = 2(12)

2(12) is the same as writing 2x12 and since multiplication and division are interchangeable you go left to right, which means you divide before you multiply, which also means the answer is 288.

 

[boys noize]

Incredible how this thread went 42 pages in a day. Still with no consensus

. I still stand by 2 but as this thread has gone on, it seems the momentum had swung back and forth. It seems to be in 2's favor right now but maybe the 288's have something new to bring to the table?

 

[boys noize]

Incredible how this thread went 42 pages in a day. Still with no consensus

. I still stand by 2 but as this thread has gone on, it seems the momentum had swung back and forth. It seems to be in 2's favor right now but maybe the 288's have something new to bring to the table?

 

[240Zestways]

Originally Posted by ncmalko1

You do the paranthesis equation first which is.........

2(9 plus 3) which is 24
48/24


You don't do the parethesis addition only
48/2 x 12

The entire parenthesis formula is completed first. That is why the answer is 2

You do know the 2 is outside of the parenthesis right? The first rule only applies to things INSIDE of the parenthesis.
2(9+3) = 2(12)

2(12) is the same as writing 2x12 and since multiplication and division are interchangeable you go left to right, which means you divide before you multiply, which also means the answer is 288.

 

[carver]

288