48÷2(9+3) =

[Locut0s]

This is a good point... Experts is dumb; I think a major part of that is ignoring effective communication in favor of efficient-poop communication.

No experts aren't dumb they are experts. It's just proof that there isn't a good consensus amongst even those who do math for a living. Of course computers will always give you one answer, because you have to choose one or the other of the interpretations to program the computer to follow. That doesn't necessarily mean the opposite interpretation is 100% wrong.

 

[Locut0s]

It does not if you put it that way. It is always left to right.. multiplication does not take precedence over division.

But a lot of people, math profs and PHDs alike, will perform that statement as a single unit just because of the way it is written.

 

[JechtShot]

Do people seriously care this much? Seriously?

That's what I been wondering all along..

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2156593

 

[Evadman]

Steps:
48÷2(9+3)
48÷2*(9+3)
48÷2*12
24*12
288

Any other answer is by someone who doesn't understand order of operations and will be banned when I go back though this thread.

 

[evident]

holy fuck, it's absolutely not 2.

you can't distribute the 2 to the (9+3) because it's preceded by a division.

 

[busydude]

But a lot of people, math profs and PHDs alike, will perform that statement as a single unit just because of the way it is written.

You need to be sure that 2(9+3) = 2*(9+3).. that is first ambiguity.. the second is that people are assuming implied parenthesis and they think 2(9+3)= [2*(9+3)].. which is not the case.

2(9+3) = 2*(9+3).. then 288 is the only answer. Although.. its not written anywhere, I think its pretty common knowledge to assume 2(9+3) as 2*(9+3).

We are going over this again and again... the ambiguous part of the whole expression is 2(9+3).. if you assume it to be a valid expression.. then the answer is going to be 288, otherwise that expression is not valid.

 

[evident]

You need to be sure that 2(9+3) = 2*(9+3).. that is first ambiguity.. the second is that people are assuming implied parenthesis and they think 2(9+3)= [2*(9+3)].. which is not the case.

2(9+3) = 2*(9+3).. then 288 is the only answer. Although.. its not written anywhere, I think its pretty common knowledge to assume 2(9+3) as 2*(9+3).

We are going over this again and again... the ambiguous part of the whole expression is 2(9+3).. if you assume it to be a valid expression.. then the answer is going to be 288, otherwise that expression is not valid.

there is nothing ambiguous with 2(9+3), unless you're a troll!

 

[HumblePie]

You need to be sure that 2(9+3) = 2*(9+3).. that is first ambiguity.. the second is that people are assuming implied parenthesis and they think 2(9+3)= [2*(9+3)].. which is not the case.

2(9+3) = 2*(9+3).. then 288 is the only answer. Although.. its not written anywhere, I think its pretty common knowledge to assume 2(9+3) as 2*(9+3).

We are going over this again and again... the ambiguous part of the whole expression is 2(9+3).. if you assume it to be a valid expression.. then the answer is going to be 288, otherwise that expression is not valid.

Nothing ambiguous with 2(9 + 3) = 2*(9 + 3) at all. That is just the way it is. That is a completely legit equation I typed just now and can be validated.

The problem stems from some text books that did some short form inline crap like this as a problem.

4x^2/2x

and had at the back of the book the answer as 2x when the real answer is 2x^3. The funny thing is I STILL have a calculus book that did one problem like that and had the answer one way and did the exact same problem with just different numbers and had it the other way. We discussed this in class and the teach stated he would take either answer but really it should be done using the correct order of operations which would be as I used above. Now I'm hankering to look that up in the book but it's one thick ass book and I didn't exactly memorize the part is screwed up.

Too many crappy text books out there. You wouldn't believe how many of them have so many wrong answers that gets duplicated every year in new editions. Deitel and Deitel books anyone?

Again too many people were taught the wrong way with that juxtaposition crap that isn't a math property at all.

 

[her209]

there is nothing ambiguous with 2(9+3), unless you're a troll!

If you set x = (9+3)

Now it becomes:

48÷2x which is not the same as 48÷2*x

See the ambiguity?

 

[Juddog]

If you set x = (9+3)

Now it becomes:

48÷2x which is not the same as 48÷2*x

See the ambiguity?

No I don't see the ambiguity. The only thing I see is you continuing to troll.

 

[evident]

If you set x = (9+3)

Now it becomes:

48÷2x which is not the same as 48÷2*x

See the ambiguity?

there is nowhere in this math problem where a variable x is present. gtfo :thumbsdown: D:

edit: and yes, they ARE the same

 

[her209]

No I don't see the ambiguity. The only thing I see is you continuing to troll.

Because my answer doesn't agree with your view, I'm trolling? Wow.

 

[her209]

there is nowhere in this math problem where a variable x is present. gtfo :thumbsdown: D:

No there isn't. But I was making a point that was already made earlier in this thread.

 

[Juddog]

Because my answer doesn't agree with your view, I'm trolling? Wow.

No - you keep saying there is an ambiguity when there isn't. Thus you be trollin'.

 

[busydude]

4x^2/2x

Unless the author explicitly states that 4x^2 and 2x are two different functions.. the answer is going to be 2x^3.

Also, if I were to ask a question.. I would use parenthesis along with "/" division sign to make it absolutely clear.. or use the horizontal line to represent division.

 

[Schfifty Five]

No - you keep saying there is an ambiguity when there isn't. Thus you be trollin'.

Fail.

 

[Matthiasa]

I suspect a certian forum doesn't understand what emeritus means.
But back on topic this agreeing to disagree and letting this would probably be the best course as supposed proof has been given from both sides and neither is changing their mind or coming to an understanding.

(read it's basically a spam thread now)

 

[Juddog]

The standard is that multiplication/division have same precedence, and are done left to right. Similarly for addition and subtraction. Following this simple rule, the answer is 288. If you want to try and interpret the equation in a non-standard fashion, then you're simply wrong.

 

[Juddog]

I suspect a certian forum doesn't understand what emeritus means.
But back on topic this agreeing to disagree and letting this would probably be the best course as supposed proof has been given from both sides and neither is changing their mind or coming to an understand.

(read it's basically a spam thread now)

IF you "agree to disagree", then that implies you are using your own method of dealing with the problem which is non-standard. Thus, you are simply wrong. People get sloppy from writing things shorthand and thus are trying to interpret the equation in their own special way, which is deviating from standard fashion.

 

[her209]

edit: and yes, they ARE the same

No they aren't the same.

For example,

1/2x is equivalent to (1/2)(1/x) and not (1/2)x.

 

[airdata]

It does not if you put it that way. It is always left to right.. multiplication does not take precedence over division.

lol... that's up for debate That's what we're doing here. I'm saying it is up for debate and that there are 2 sides to the equation. 48 is on the left, / is in the middle, and 2(9+3) is on the right.

People who share my view have talked about the lack of multiplication sign makes it an implied multiplication, which makes it a higher priority. 2(9+3) is a single statement. 48 is being devided by 2(9+3).

2 FTW 321 people cannot be wrong.

 

[busydude]

1/2x is equivalent to (1/2)(1/x) and not (1/2)x.

Ahh.. come on man, get a grip.

 

[Juddog]

Google: 288
Wolfram Alpha: 288
Excel: 288

/thread

 

[Numenorean]

lol... that's up for debate That's what we're doing here. I'm saying it is up for debate and that there are 2 sides to the equation. 48 is on the left, / is in the middle, and 2(9+3) is on the right.

People who share my view have talked about the lack of multiplication sign makes it an implied multiplication, which makes it a higher priority. 2(9+3) is a single statement. 48 is being devided by 2(9+3).

2 FTW 321 people cannot be wrong.

Multiplication does not have a higher priority than division, regardless if the sign is there or not.

 

[BrokenVisage]

Steps:
48÷2(9+3)
48÷2*(9+3)
48÷2*12
24*12
288

Any other answer is by someone who doesn't understand order of operations and will be banned when I go back though this thread.

The gauntlet has been throwned!