48÷2(9+3) = ???

[megachamploo]

i don't think it's poorly written, people are just looking at it the wrong way.

unless the there are extra parentheses to group the (9+3) and the 2, the division symbol applies to the 2 and only the 2.

 

[irocktmacs]

Originally Posted by megachamploo

i don't think it's poorly written, people are just looking at it the wrong way.

unless the there are extra parentheses to group the (9+3) and the 2, the division symbol applies to the 2 and only the 2.

Unless you wanna follow the rule of juxtaposition, which states you distribute the 2 first, and then you can divide.

That is why there are two answers being argued over.

Since I don't think the rule of juxtaposition is a very good one, and since it is not absolute and not practiced by every mathematician, I'm gonna treat the 2(9+3) as 2x(9+3) and follow order of operations to get 288.

But I see where the "2" people are coming from. If you believe in the rule of juxtaposition, you'll distribute the 2 first,

If you don't believe in the rule of juxtaposition, which is fine because the rule is not absolute, you'll get 288.

 

[irocktmacs]

Originally Posted by megachamploo

i don't think it's poorly written, people are just looking at it the wrong way.

unless the there are extra parentheses to group the (9+3) and the 2, the division symbol applies to the 2 and only the 2.

Unless you wanna follow the rule of juxtaposition, which states you distribute the 2 first, and then you can divide.

That is why there are two answers being argued over.

Since I don't think the rule of juxtaposition is a very good one, and since it is not absolute and not practiced by every mathematician, I'm gonna treat the 2(9+3) as 2x(9+3) and follow order of operations to get 288.

But I see where the "2" people are coming from. If you believe in the rule of juxtaposition, you'll distribute the 2 first,

If you don't believe in the rule of juxtaposition, which is fine because the rule is not absolute, you'll get 288.

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by IRockTMacs

Originally Posted by megachamploo

i don't think it's poorly written, people are just looking at it the wrong way.

unless the there are extra parentheses to group the (9+3) and the 2, the division symbol applies to the 2 and only the 2.

Unless you wanna follow the rule of juxtaposition, which states you distribute the 2 first, and then you can divide.

That is why there are two answers being argued over.

Since I don't think the rule of juxtaposition is a very good one, and since it is not absolute and not practiced by every mathematician, I'm gonna treat the 2(9+3) as 2x(9+3) and follow order of operations to get 288.

But I see where the "2" people are coming from. If you believe in the rule of juxtaposition, you'll distribute the 2 first,

If you don't believe in the rule of juxtaposition, which is fine because the rule is not absolute, you'll get 288.

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by IRockTMacs

Originally Posted by megachamploo

i don't think it's poorly written, people are just looking at it the wrong way.

unless the there are extra parentheses to group the (9+3) and the 2, the division symbol applies to the 2 and only the 2.

Unless you wanna follow the rule of juxtaposition, which states you distribute the 2 first, and then you can divide.

That is why there are two answers being argued over.

Since I don't think the rule of juxtaposition is a very good one, and since it is not absolute and not practiced by every mathematician, I'm gonna treat the 2(9+3) as 2x(9+3) and follow order of operations to get 288.

But I see where the "2" people are coming from. If you believe in the rule of juxtaposition, you'll distribute the 2 first,

If you don't believe in the rule of juxtaposition, which is fine because the rule is not absolute, you'll get 288.

 

[usainboltisfast]

^ google the rule of juxtaposition and find any credible source that says it's true. I've looked and the any time it is brought up is in threads about this equation.

 

[usainboltisfast]

^ google the rule of juxtaposition and find any credible source that says it's true. I've looked and the any time it is brought up is in threads about this equation.

 

[los angeles fresh]

let's just wrap parentheses everywhere

(4 / (2) * (9+3)

= (4 / (2) * (12)

= 48 / 2 * 12

= 24 * 12

= 288

 

[los angeles fresh]

let's just wrap parentheses everywhere

(4 / (2) * (9+3)

= (4 / (2) * (12)

= 48 / 2 * 12

= 24 * 12

= 288

 

[mronegative]

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

The common sense in most people tell them to finish what they started. But apparently, once you get that 12, you need to look back at the equation and go from left to right.. Maybe it's laziness to just finish what you started and THEN jump to the left to finally do the division

Originally Posted by mosk33toe

Originally Posted by hella handsome

Originally Posted by StrongMind3



1...right?

No matter how you do that equation, its going to be 1 

This problem is a little more misleading than that. That equation is just awkward on the eyes at first glance. 

It will not always be 1. For all the people that are saying PEMDAS infers that Multiplication has more priority than Division, this means that Addition has more priority than Subtraction.  Therefore they would compute this 1-1+1 = 1-(2) = -1.

Case in point... the answer is 288

-Signed your resident UCLA Math Major

Originally Posted by snakeyes17

Thank you.

 

[mronegative]

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

The common sense in most people tell them to finish what they started. But apparently, once you get that 12, you need to look back at the equation and go from left to right.. Maybe it's laziness to just finish what you started and THEN jump to the left to finally do the division

Originally Posted by mosk33toe

Originally Posted by hella handsome

Originally Posted by StrongMind3



1...right?

No matter how you do that equation, its going to be 1 

This problem is a little more misleading than that. That equation is just awkward on the eyes at first glance. 

It will not always be 1. For all the people that are saying PEMDAS infers that Multiplication has more priority than Division, this means that Addition has more priority than Subtraction.  Therefore they would compute this 1-1+1 = 1-(2) = -1.

Case in point... the answer is 288

-Signed your resident UCLA Math Major

Originally Posted by snakeyes17

Thank you.

 

[kn0wledgeable]

its 288 though

i asked this yesterday on twitter and everyone went HAM.

 

[kn0wledgeable]

its 288 though

i asked this yesterday on twitter and everyone went HAM.

 

[proper english]

the answer is 7

 

[proper english]

the answer is 7

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by MrONegative

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

The common sense in most people tell them to finish what they started. But apparently, once you get that 12, you need to look back at the equation and go from left to right.. Maybe it's laziness to just finish what you started and THEN jump to the left to finally do the division

Originally Posted by mosk33toe

Originally Posted by hella handsome


No matter how you do that equation, its going to be 1 

This problem is a little more misleading than that. That equation is just awkward on the eyes at first glance. 

It will not always be 1. For all the people that are saying PEMDAS infers that Multiplication has more priority than Division, this means that Addition has more priority than Subtraction.  Therefore they would compute this 1-1+1 = 1-(2) = -1.

Case in point... the answer is 288

-Signed your resident UCLA Math Major

Originally Posted by snakeyes17

Thank you.

That's not the same equation as the one posted...

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by MrONegative

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

The common sense in most people tell them to finish what they started. But apparently, once you get that 12, you need to look back at the equation and go from left to right.. Maybe it's laziness to just finish what you started and THEN jump to the left to finally do the division

Originally Posted by mosk33toe

Originally Posted by hella handsome


No matter how you do that equation, its going to be 1 

This problem is a little more misleading than that. That equation is just awkward on the eyes at first glance. 

It will not always be 1. For all the people that are saying PEMDAS infers that Multiplication has more priority than Division, this means that Addition has more priority than Subtraction.  Therefore they would compute this 1-1+1 = 1-(2) = -1.

Case in point... the answer is 288

-Signed your resident UCLA Math Major

Originally Posted by snakeyes17

Thank you.

That's not the same equation as the one posted...

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by Wr

Originally Posted by MrONegative

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

The common sense in most people tell them to finish what they started. But apparently, once you get that 12, you need to look back at the equation and go from left to right.. Maybe it's laziness to just finish what you started and THEN jump to the left to finally do the division

Originally Posted by mosk33toe


It will not always be 1. For all the people that are saying PEMDAS infers that Multiplication has more priority than Division, this means that Addition has more priority than Subtraction.  Therefore they would compute this 1-1+1 = 1-(2) = -1.

Case in point... the answer is 288

-Signed your resident UCLA Math Major

Originally Posted by snakeyes17

Thank you.

That's not the same equation as the one posted...

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by Wr

Originally Posted by MrONegative

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

The common sense in most people tell them to finish what they started. But apparently, once you get that 12, you need to look back at the equation and go from left to right.. Maybe it's laziness to just finish what you started and THEN jump to the left to finally do the division

Originally Posted by mosk33toe


It will not always be 1. For all the people that are saying PEMDAS infers that Multiplication has more priority than Division, this means that Addition has more priority than Subtraction.  Therefore they would compute this 1-1+1 = 1-(2) = -1.

Case in point... the answer is 288

-Signed your resident UCLA Math Major

Originally Posted by snakeyes17

Thank you.

That's not the same equation as the one posted...

 

[wr]

There's a difference between the equations in the input field and the highlighted field.

 

[wr]

There's a difference between the equations in the input field and the highlighted field.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by Wr

There's a difference between the equations in the input field and the highlighted field.

The funny thing is that it isnt. If you were supposed to multiply by 2 first there would be another set of parenthesis.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by Wr

There's a difference between the equations in the input field and the highlighted field.

The funny thing is that it isnt. If you were supposed to multiply by 2 first there would be another set of parenthesis.

 

[snakeyes17]

The highlighted field is the input.

 

[snakeyes17]

The highlighted field is the input.