But in truth, 288 is just as valid, if only because the question does not specify which method it intends you to use. If you work it from left to right, you get 288. If you treat the 2 as a coefficient of the terms in the bracket, you will evaluate that first and get two. Matter of personal preference. I will refute any arguments that division comes before multiplication based on the order of operations, because they are technically identical (division is the same as multiplication by the reciprocal, so x/2 = (1/2)*x, for example).Lord Stompy said:Okay, how about an expression to sort out the dividing and multipling, just as an example to people who think otherwise.
So we have the expression
48÷2x
The 2 belongs to the x, because that's how many x components there are. The 48 doesn't magically 'take' the 2 from the 2x term, making the expression simplify to:
24x
That's ridiculous, even if you only have limited knowledge of mathematics you can see this doesn't work.
Now, if we say that x=(9+3), we substitute x with (9+3) and arrive at the original expression of 48÷2(9+3)
If you then repeat the process with the original equation, once again, the 48 does not take the 2 from the (9+3) term
Hence the answer arrived at is that 48÷2(9+3)= 2
For the more graphically inclined people here is a simple way of sorting this out:
48
48÷2(9+3) = --------------------
2(9+3)
The terms are seperated by the division line so there is no confusion.
Hope some of you learnt something.
the answer is 4/5 or 0.8. Parsing from left to right. I have no idea how you end up with 0.79 but if you meant 0.8 then you were parsing correctly and you would end up with 288 at the OP's formulaBreadzombie said:4/3*(2+1)/5 isn't hard at all.It's 0,79(or 0,78 depending on how many numbers you take from the repeating decimal)Thomas Rembrandt said:Yes indeed, it's amazing how wrong (and proud of it) you are.Breadzombie said:Seriously? That's like third grade stuff right there!Second grade even!
It's 2. No other answer is true or acceptable in any form or way.
How you people even pass math if you can't solve this.And I'm not trying to be a douche or anything , but this simply amazes me !
Multiplications and Diversions have to be interpreted from left to right, otherwise any computer would get confused with longer equations. Try something like 4/3*(2+1)/5 and then what?
so 288 is the correct answer. Any math software including google and wolfram alpha tell the same.
you need to expand the bracket first.Revelo said:You apply a technique called BoDMAS. Which is an method which states:
Brackets
over
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
Essentially it is an order of priority, the higher up you go, the higher the priority in the sum is. This was a technique I applied in A-Levels and is rather relvent here I feel in solving this problem.
So by this method, the answer is:
48/2(9+3)
= 48/2*12
= 24*12
= 288
And there you go, simple and effective.
It's the the same.Latter equation is people being stupid.This is just worded wrongly and causes discussion of the prime order of actions in an equation.Merkavar said:288
bedmas or what ever
so 9+3=12
48/2=12*12=288
![]()
Correct. Also best usage of /thread I've seen on this website.Spencer Petersen said:288
1.Terms inside parentheses or brackets
2.Exponents and roots
3.Multiplication and division as they appear left to right
4.Addition and subtraction as they appear left to right
That is the order
/thread
Thomas Rembrandt said:the answer is 4/5 or 0.8. Parsing from left to right. I have no idea how you end up with 0.79 but if you meant 0.8 then you were parsing correctly and you would end up with 288 at the OP's formulaBreadzombie said:4/3*(2+1)/5 isn't hard at all.It's 0,79(or 0,78 depending on how many numbers you take from the repeating decimal)Thomas Rembrandt said:Yes indeed, it's amazing how wrong (and proud of it) you are.Breadzombie said:Seriously? That's like third grade stuff right there!Second grade even!
It's 2. No other answer is true or acceptable in any form or way.
How you people even pass math if you can't solve this.And I'm not trying to be a douche or anything , but this simply amazes me !
Multiplications and Diversions have to be interpreted from left to right, otherwise any computer would get confused with longer equations. Try something like 4/3*(2+1)/5 and then what?
so 288 is the correct answer. Any math software including google and wolfram alpha tell the same.
Married? Can't say I've heard that term in Mathematical situation before.Thomas Rembrandt said:At 48÷2x12 <- why do you assume "2x12" belong together? There is your mistake, they are not marriedBroady Brio said:48÷2(9+3)=?
48÷2x12=?
48÷24=?
=2
so ... 288
I like this response, as it makes me feel less stupid. Kudos.Durananrananrananran said:Here's one answer:Breadzombie said:Seriously? That's like third grade stuff right there!Second grade even!
It's 2. No other answer is true or acceptable in any form or way.
How you people even pass math if you can't solve this.And I'm not trying to be a douche or anything , but this simply amazes me !
Here's my answer. The question is ambiguous. It isn't a maths problem, its a symbolic language parsing problem. The solution you get depends on your parsing algorithm, and not on any fundamental understanding of maths. Maths is fundamental, the language system used to express it is arbitrary and, if poorly designed, fallible.ECasThat said:
4/3 = 1 and a third. (4/3) * (3/5) = (12/15) = (4/5) = 0.8. Go back to 2n class, mate.Breadzombie said:Thomas Rembrandt said:the answer is 4/5 or 0.8. Parsing from left to right. I have no idea how you end up with 0.79 but if you meant 0.8 then you were parsing correctly and you would end up with 288 at the OP's formulaBreadzombie said:4/3*(2+1)/5 isn't hard at all.It's 0,79(or 0,78 depending on how many numbers you take from the repeating decimal)Thomas Rembrandt said:Yes indeed, it's amazing how wrong (and proud of it) you are.Breadzombie said:Seriously? That's like third grade stuff right there!Second grade even!
It's 2. No other answer is true or acceptable in any form or way.
How you people even pass math if you can't solve this.And I'm not trying to be a douche or anything , but this simply amazes me !
Multiplications and Diversions have to be interpreted from left to right, otherwise any computer would get confused with longer equations. Try something like 4/3*(2+1)/5 and then what?
so 288 is the correct answer. Any math software including google and wolfram alpha tell the same.
4/3 = 1,3333333inf
3/5 = 0,6
1,333333infx0,6 = 0,79 or 1,3 x 0,6 = 0
I have no idea how you end up with 0,8 and as i said it's second grade math , so no i'm not proud of it at all.