Yeah for common ground! Our relationship just hit an inception point and I think things are looking up.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Solve this simple math problem: 48/2(9+3)
- Thread starter coolwater
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Yeah for common ground! Our relationship just hit an inception point and I think things are looking up.
Yeah for common ground! Our relationship just hit an inception point and I think things are looking up.
Nothing wrong with a fun disagreement, though! Time to hit the hay, have a good night!
Part of the problem is reducing equations to to typewritten ASCII text.
In a real scientific or math paper we would take care to typeset it clearly using TeX or some other way to reinforce the order of operations.
As many have said, there is no uncertainty in this particular example except for those people who are not used to dealing with even more complex expressions.
B
No, they usually write it using specialized program so you would clearly know if it's
48
2 * (9+3)
or
____48___
2*(9+3)
But really, if you see this as 48÷2(9+3), I think it becomes much more clearer. Most people aren't used to see / used as a division mark other than when using two lines, not used as a simple replacement as it is for computer. But yes they wouldn't go through the trouble of rewriting an equation just to make the order of operation simpler, as that is quite easy when you work with math everyday. But they do tidy up their equations so the intent should become clear. I mean, you could type verbally an equation, this is just the equivalent to punctuation, you put a point and a capital letter to start a new sentence.
This question is purely semantics. But scientists tend to write for other scientists who have no trouble saying this is 288. But most profs I've had hate answering questions over email simply because writing equations with regular characters is crap.
Last edited:
It is easier to read some with them out of order. Big time when you start factoring stuff out. It is easier to just put them in front so you can reference them.
Anyone who says 2 clearly can not do any real math. Also remember division is simple multiplying by some decimal number. For examly 1/2 = .5
Multiplying something by 0.5 is the same as dividing it by 2. Subtraction is just adding a negative number. Now days that is often how I treat subtraction is just adding a negative number. Makes things a lot easier
Whenever you write math symbols out using a keyboard, the "/" symbol always means division; it is not a fraction bar. Therefore, I treat the "/" symbol as a division operation, and get 288.
If one reads the "/" symbol as a fraction bar, then the answer is 2. However, because of the limitations of a standard QWERTY keyboard (which I assume is all we have to work with), it is wise to always represent numerators and denominators with master brackets. To make this equation equal 2, it should read 48/(2(9+3))
If one reads the "/" symbol as a fraction bar, then the answer is 2. However, because of the limitations of a standard QWERTY keyboard (which I assume is all we have to work with), it is wise to always represent numerators and denominators with master brackets. To make this equation equal 2, it should read 48/(2(9+3))
This thread is hilarious. Take a calculator and enter the numbers the exact way they are in the OP and you'll only get one answer... On any calculator. If you think you're smarter then a calculator.. Well I have nothing to say to you. Just... Good luck to your ego.
Answer is 288.
Answer is 288.
I inputed it exactly like this in my calculator and I got 2. So...
Edit: I voted 2 because I thought of it as 48 over (/) 2(9+3)
But written as 48÷2(9+3) I would say 288...
Strange.
You didn't enter it properly then...
Attachments
I didn't quite read the whole thread, and I've seen people trying to present definitive answers representing multiple possible answers. While I don't claim to be an end all source, math is one thing that I can do and do understand.
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x ÷ just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right.
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x ÷ just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right.
Attachments
Last edited:
Last edited:
Try using a calculator that uses the "/" instead of the divided by sign. You'll get 288. I tried it the way you did it on an old calculator and I got 2. But that's not the way it is in the OP. It's 48/2(9+3)
Oh really? Wow I didn't know that... Sarcasm.
I'm talking about on a calculator. Enter it EXACTLY how it was in the OP and you'll get 288.
My Ti-nspire converted this problem into I'm going to use words to avoid confusion: forty-eight halves times 12 is equal to two hundred eighty eight.
I'm going to ask my ingenious math teacher about this on Monday, and I'll report back with the answer.
I'm going to ask my ingenious math teacher about this on Monday, and I'll report back with the answer.
Again, I'd like to warn people: this is not always true. Even if you enter it exactly as above, your calculator will not always give you 288. Some will give you two. Some settings may give you two. Don't trust a calculator blindly.
no you do this....
1) (9+3)=12
2) 48/2=24
3) 24*12=288
Multiplication does NOT take precedence over division
Looks like your sarcasm is on par with you math. When you have to explain sarcasm, it's not really sarcastic.
Reset your settings to default and you'll get 288. I've tried it on 7 calculators that I've found around the house. 6 of them equalled to 288 and the 7th one equalled to 2. But that calculator did not have the numbers entered exactly as in the OP. Or you can go try it on Google. Google doesn't lie.
It must be on par with your math skills then. Horrible.
Last edited by a moderator:
I detect some sarcasm here, but I'm not sure, you didn't tell us if you were trying to be or not.
sorry but business calculator is not a scientific one and thus not valid for this argument.
- Status