- 1,885
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2000
48÷2(9+3) = ???
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by n1k3b4ller,
- Start date
- 1,885
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2000
- 12,305
- 9,326
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
The answer is 2
- 12,305
- 9,326
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
The answer is 2
- 2,649
- 512
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
Where can we find it and why isn't it listed anywhere alongside the mathematical order of operation?
All I've read is that juxtaposition is used as a substitute for multiplication. For example:
a ⢠b ⢠c ⢠d = abcd = abc(d) where d=e+f
I have to solve e+f first, but I can do the rest in any order after than.
Like I've said previously, Say what you will, but the mathematical community views the juxtaposition rule as if it exists. I've taken a LOT of math tests, finished Calc last semester, if you were to think without the juxtaposition rule on a test it would be counted as a misstep which would make the rest of the problem wrong. You can argue the philosophical value of the juxtaposition rule all you want, the fact of the matter is that if you don't use it, your math professor will mark your answer wrong no matter how good your reasoning is. That's all I have to say about that. Again, good day.
- 2,649
- 512
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
Where can we find it and why isn't it listed anywhere alongside the mathematical order of operation?
All I've read is that juxtaposition is used as a substitute for multiplication. For example:
a ⢠b ⢠c ⢠d = abcd = abc(d) where d=e+f
I have to solve e+f first, but I can do the rest in any order after than.
Like I've said previously, Say what you will, but the mathematical community views the juxtaposition rule as if it exists. I've taken a LOT of math tests, finished Calc last semester, if you were to think without the juxtaposition rule on a test it would be counted as a misstep which would make the rest of the problem wrong. You can argue the philosophical value of the juxtaposition rule all you want, the fact of the matter is that if you don't use it, your math professor will mark your answer wrong no matter how good your reasoning is. That's all I have to say about that. Again, good day.
- 1,885
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2000
It's not that I don't believe you. I just want more than, "because they say that's the rule." I understand it and I'm sure I'd apply it in my everyday life just as I was doing in this thread until a few minutes ago.
Now I have doubt. That's all it is. I'm questioning my belief in a "parenthetical juxtaposition rule" because it doesn't make logical sense and I can't find any support for it on the internet.
Now I have doubt. That's all it is. I'm questioning my belief in a "parenthetical juxtaposition rule" because it doesn't make logical sense and I can't find any support for it on the internet.
- 1,885
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2000
It's not that I don't believe you. I just want more than, "because they say that's the rule." I understand it and I'm sure I'd apply it in my everyday life just as I was doing in this thread until a few minutes ago.
Now I have doubt. That's all it is. I'm questioning my belief in a "parenthetical juxtaposition rule" because it doesn't make logical sense and I can't find any support for it on the internet.
Now I have doubt. That's all it is. I'm questioning my belief in a "parenthetical juxtaposition rule" because it doesn't make logical sense and I can't find any support for it on the internet.
- 2,013
- 14
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
46 pages!
Some of you are thinking the parenthesis only mean multiplication, but they also automatically associate anything in the parenthesis to the value directly outside the parenthesis.
So do it this way, replace (9+3) with x
[h3]48 ÷ 2x =
[/h3]48
2x
48
2(9+3) =
2
2x and 2(9+3) are handled the same way
[h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)= 288 though
[/h3]
- 2,013
- 14
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
46 pages!
Some of you are thinking the parenthesis only mean multiplication, but they also automatically associate anything in the parenthesis to the value directly outside the parenthesis.
So do it this way, replace (9+3) with x
[h3]48 ÷ 2x =
[/h3]48
2x
48
2(9+3) =
2
2x and 2(9+3) are handled the same way
[h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)= 288 though
[/h3]
- 2,013
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- 2,013
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- 3,254
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2006
Originally Posted by GRyPR33
46 pages!
Some of you are thinking the parenthesis only mean multiplication, but they also automatically associate anything in the parenthesis to the value directly outside the parenthesis.
So do it this way, replace (9+3) with x
[h3]48 ÷ 2x =
[/h3]48
2x
48
2(9+3) =
2
2x and 2(9+3) are handled the same way
[h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)= 288 though
[/h3]
It is not even a mind=blowing question
- 3,254
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2006
Originally Posted by GRyPR33
46 pages!
Some of you are thinking the parenthesis only mean multiplication, but they also automatically associate anything in the parenthesis to the value directly outside the parenthesis.
So do it this way, replace (9+3) with x
[h3]48 ÷ 2x =
[/h3]48
2x
48
2(9+3) =
2
2x and 2(9+3) are handled the same way
[h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)= 288 though
[/h3]
It is not even a mind=blowing question
- 69,518
- 105,967
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2010
Originally Posted by E3LAL
Originally Posted by GRyPR33
46 pages!
Some of you are thinking the parenthesis only mean multiplication, but they also automatically associate anything in the parenthesis to the value directly outside the parenthesis.
So do it this way, replace (9+3) with x
[h3]48 ÷ 2x =
[/h3]48
2x
48
2(9+3) =
2
2x and 2(9+3) are handled the same way
[h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)= 288 though
[/h3]
Unless I'm horribly mistaken, you do whatever is in the parenthesis first then you do multiplying/division in the order that it comes in...my TI-84 said it is 288 btw.
It is not even a mind=blowing question
Yes but the 2 is still touching the parenthesis. When have you had an algebra problem that rewrites as 2(x)=2*x instead of 2(x)=2x? Having the 2 makes sense. And people not reading and just posting smilies and making dumb comments with the utmost confidence are what's wrong with this country, not the folks using their brain on either side with solid arguments.
- 69,518
- 105,967
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2010
Originally Posted by E3LAL
Originally Posted by GRyPR33
46 pages!
Some of you are thinking the parenthesis only mean multiplication, but they also automatically associate anything in the parenthesis to the value directly outside the parenthesis.
So do it this way, replace (9+3) with x
[h3]48 ÷ 2x =
[/h3]48
2x
48
2(9+3) =
2
2x and 2(9+3) are handled the same way
[h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]
[/h3][h3]48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)= 288 though
[/h3]
Unless I'm horribly mistaken, you do whatever is in the parenthesis first then you do multiplying/division in the order that it comes in...my TI-84 said it is 288 btw.
It is not even a mind=blowing question
Yes but the 2 is still touching the parenthesis. When have you had an algebra problem that rewrites as 2(x)=2*x instead of 2(x)=2x? Having the 2 makes sense. And people not reading and just posting smilies and making dumb comments with the utmost confidence are what's wrong with this country, not the folks using their brain on either side with solid arguments.
- 2,013
- 14
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
That would be correct if you were going strictly off of order of operations, but there is an association between 2 and (9+3).Originally Posted by E3LAL
Unless I'm horribly mistaken, you do whatever is in the parenthesis first then you do multiplying/division in the order that it comes in...my TI-84 said it is 288 btw.
It is not even a mind=blowing question
You have to do them together as I tried to explain above
When you look at the algebraic expression using 2x you do not split 2 and x up in this equation, 2(9+3) is the same way. The parenthesis draw the same association.
- 2,013
- 14
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
That would be correct if you were going strictly off of order of operations, but there is an association between 2 and (9+3).Originally Posted by E3LAL
Unless I'm horribly mistaken, you do whatever is in the parenthesis first then you do multiplying/division in the order that it comes in...my TI-84 said it is 288 btw.
It is not even a mind=blowing question
You have to do them together as I tried to explain above
When you look at the algebraic expression using 2x you do not split 2 and x up in this equation, 2(9+3) is the same way. The parenthesis draw the same association.
- 2,013
- 14
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
The fact that there's so much debate about this simple math problem shows that the educational system is what's wrong with this country.
- 2,013
- 14
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
The fact that there's so much debate about this simple math problem shows that the educational system is what's wrong with this country.
- 541
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2008
yeah but calculators are notorious for not doing order of operations, sometimes you have to put a () to let it know it needs to do something first. The question is poorly written and can go either way. I personally think the answer is 2 but if someone were to say 288 i see their justification.
- 541
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2008
yeah but calculators are notorious for not doing order of operations, sometimes you have to put a () to let it know it needs to do something first. The question is poorly written and can go either way. I personally think the answer is 2 but if someone were to say 288 i see their justification.
- 3,648
- 1,223
- Joined
- May 22, 2005
I am in complete shock at how long this thread is...
The answer is 2.
Seriously? It's just like GRyyPR33 said and showed above.
I'm happy there's a reason for the text I randomly got to this equation yesterday at least, I was wondering why my friend would ask me this and he's a smart individual like myself and should've known as quick as I told him...at least that makes sense now
Good ol' NT
The answer is 2.
Seriously? It's just like GRyyPR33 said and showed above.
I'm happy there's a reason for the text I randomly got to this equation yesterday at least, I was wondering why my friend would ask me this and he's a smart individual like myself and should've known as quick as I told him...at least that makes sense now
Good ol' NT
- 3,648
- 1,223
- Joined
- May 22, 2005
I am in complete shock at how long this thread is...
The answer is 2.
Seriously? It's just like GRyyPR33 said and showed above.
I'm happy there's a reason for the text I randomly got to this equation yesterday at least, I was wondering why my friend would ask me this and he's a smart individual like myself and should've known as quick as I told him...at least that makes sense now
Good ol' NT
The answer is 2.
Seriously? It's just like GRyyPR33 said and showed above.
I'm happy there's a reason for the text I randomly got to this equation yesterday at least, I was wondering why my friend would ask me this and he's a smart individual like myself and should've known as quick as I told him...at least that makes sense now
Good ol' NT
- 4,363
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
Some *snip* believe that / means a fraction? No *snip* the slash is short hand for division. Learn a programming language and say other wise
Edit: warned for name calling
Edit: warned for name calling
