View Poll Results: 48÷2(9+3) = ????
2
30
54.55%
288
25
45.45%
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll
Are we smarter than bodybuilders?
#41
Regener8ed is right, its simply unclear as to what is being asked.
48.000 Ignore the zeros, they are just there to make the line fit.
(2(9+3))
or
(48/2) * (9+3)
Left to right has never and will never work in math. Thats why there is order of operations.
edited: made mistakes
48.000 Ignore the zeros, they are just there to make the line fit.
(2(9+3))
or
(48/2) * (9+3)
Left to right has never and will never work in math. Thats why there is order of operations.
edited: made mistakes
#42
48*(9+3)
________
2
288 is wrong
48 / 2(9+3)
2(9+3) you have to times the 2 by 12 because it is part of the bracket.
if it wasn't it would be written like 2*(9+3), but it is not written like that.
insert an x for any number on the left side of the equation below and see if you get x = that number in the end.
It will not because it is wrong.
But do it with 2 and you will get it everytime.
48 / 2(9+3)=288
I am sitting in a office of 10 engineers and only one said it was 288 (and he is getting harrassed right now lol).
#43
#44
#45
Jeff, you may be right. I first thought it was 2, then said to myself its unclear. But yeah, that 2 is part of the parentheses. 2 is right.
Its still not perfectly clear. I would never enter it as is in any computing program.
Side note: I'm also an engineer, seems like there are a good number of us here.
Its still not perfectly clear. I would never enter it as is in any computing program.
Side note: I'm also an engineer, seems like there are a good number of us here.
#47
16 engineers saying 2
1 Co-op student said it was 288 (who realized he was wrong)
and alot of people saying thats poorly written.
#48
Looks like a bunch of us have forgot the rules of FOIL! as this one has us foiled for sure!
Personally, I always thought it was a silly rule...being mathematically dyslexic never helped me with it either.
I don't remember for sure how...but i know it is possible through proofs to "prove" that 0=1. thank you to my favorite math teacher for that one!
Personally, I always thought it was a silly rule...being mathematically dyslexic never helped me with it either.
I don't remember for sure how...but i know it is possible through proofs to "prove" that 0=1. thank you to my favorite math teacher for that one!
Last edited by Xander F4i; 04-08-2011 at 10:39 AM.
#49
*****. guys the answer would be 2 if it was written like this : 48÷[2(9+3)] = 2
However, it is NOT and thus you must compute the numbers within the parentheses first, and then use order of operations from left to right to find the solution:
1. (9+3) = (12)
2. 48 / 2 = 24
3. 24 X (12) = 288
Why would you multiply 2(12) first when order of operations dictates that you must go from left to right when division and multiplication are on equal terms? There is no imaginary bracket that tells you to multiply 2(12) before dividing 48 by 2 first. Like I said, some of you are reading the question like this:
48 / [ 2 ( 12 ) ] = 2
even though it is written like this:
48 / 2 X 12 = 288
However, it is NOT and thus you must compute the numbers within the parentheses first, and then use order of operations from left to right to find the solution:
1. (9+3) = (12)
2. 48 / 2 = 24
3. 24 X (12) = 288
Why would you multiply 2(12) first when order of operations dictates that you must go from left to right when division and multiplication are on equal terms? There is no imaginary bracket that tells you to multiply 2(12) before dividing 48 by 2 first. Like I said, some of you are reading the question like this:
48 / [ 2 ( 12 ) ] = 2
even though it is written like this:
48 / 2 X 12 = 288
#50
[QUOTE=jeffjones;
2(9+3) you have to times the 2 by 12 because it is part of the bracket.
if it wasn't it would be written like 2*(9+3), but it is not written like that.
.[/QUOTE]
That is COMPLETELY incorrect.
If it were part of a bracket there would be a bracket around it, but there isn't!
2(9+3) you have to times the 2 by 12 because it is part of the bracket.
if it wasn't it would be written like 2*(9+3), but it is not written like that.
.[/QUOTE]
That is COMPLETELY incorrect.
If it were part of a bracket there would be a bracket around it, but there isn't!