Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

# Solve 6-1x0+2/2

## Recommended Posts

DPyro    386

BEDMAS

6-1x0+2/2

6-0+2/2

6-0+1

6+1

7

cut    4

##### Share on other sites
*RedBull*    608

ok, what does 0 actually represent?

##### Share on other sites
evo0o    12

7, there is no other answer.

##### Share on other sites
Raa    1,475

7

How do I know? I used a calculator...

Can I get you to run that through a TI-85 and TI-86 please?

##### Share on other sites
Rohdekill    760

i guess for the result being 5 can only be:

6-1x(0+2)/2

6-1x(2/2)

6-(1x1)

6-1 = 5

can't see other way for that silly result lol

Actually, I think 5 came from following the steps EXACTLY in order:

6-(1x0)+2/2 (step 1: multiply)

6-0+(2/2) (step 2: divide)

6-1 (step 4: subtraction)

5

##### Share on other sites
LaP    1,886

I, for one, care whether people are able to solve a very basic arithmetic problem. It's representative of the overall level of numeracy.

But yes, it should never be written in such a way.

If you write a book about grammar but do not use any space between words, any punctuation, any paragraph and such would you complain that people don't get it ?

Yes knowing the order of operations is important and yes it's surprising that many people don't even know the basis.

But writing readable equations is as much important imo.

##### Share on other sites
Hardcore Til I Die    286

If you write a book about grammar but do not use any space between words, any punctuation, any paragraph and such would you complain that people don't get it ?

Yes knowing the order of operations is important and yes it's surprising that many people don't even know the basis.

But writing readable equations is as much important imo.

##### Share on other sites
Pikey    26

Well , using my trusty slide rule , I get 8 ... near enough ..

oh , hang on a sec ...

##### Share on other sites
neufuse    3,294

Actually, I think 5 came from following the steps EXACTLY in order:

6-(1x0)+2/2 (step 1: multiply)

6-0+(2/2) (step 2: divide)

6-1 (step 4: subtraction)

5

seriously?

6-1X0+2/2

1X0 = 0

6-0+2/2

2/2 = 1

6-0+1

(6-0) = 6

6+1

(6+1) = 7

how hard is that? Add and subtract does not mean add then subtract, it meants do addition and subtraction in left to right order add or subtract doesn't have a precident, just do them left ot right therefore you get 6 minus 0 first...

the equation rewrites from 6-1x0+2/2 to this (6 - (1 x 0)) + (2 / 2)

additon and subtraction along with multiplication and division are treated at the same precident thats why you MUST do them form left to right...

I am just amazed how so many computer esc people can't grasp at such a simple concept

##### Share on other sites
Hardcore Til I Die    286

seriously?

6-1X0+2/2

1X0 = 0

6-0+2/2

2/2 = 1

6-0+1

(6-0) = 6

6+1

(6+1) = 7

how hard is that? Add and subtract does not mean add then subtract, it meants do addition and subtraction in left to right order add or subtract doesn't have a precident, just do them left ot right therefore you get 6 minus 0 first...

the equation rewrites from 6-1x0+2/2 to this (6 - (1 x 0)) + (2 / 2)

additon and subtraction along with multiplication and division are treated at the same precident thats why you MUST do them form left to right...

I am just amazed how so many computer esc people can't grasp at such a simple concept

I think he meant that people who got 5 were following the exact order the operations appear in the BIMDAS acronym rather than the correct order.

##### Share on other sites

I was always taught BIDMAS in School and College never heard of PEMDAS before o.0.

##### Share on other sites
Richard C.    287

6-1x0+2/2

= 6-(1x0) + (2/2)

= 6 - 0 + 1

= 7

##### Share on other sites
Erich    6

Order of operations: 6-(1x0)+(2/2)

Order of operations: 6-0+1

Order of operations: 7

##### Share on other sites
CyberManifest    25

7

According to WolframAlpha

http://wolfr.am/PFuVh1

##### Share on other sites
GreenMartian    90

Well that's it. This thread proves that the average neowinian IQ is higher than the avg facebooker IQ.

We should be proud!

Haggis    998

##### Share on other sites
Rohdekill    760

seriously?

6-1X0+2/2

1X0 = 0

6-0+2/2

2/2 = 1

6-0+1

(6-0) = 6

6+1

(6+1) = 7

how hard is that? Add and subtract does not mean add then subtract, it meants do addition and subtraction in left to right order add or subtract doesn't have a precident, just do them left ot right therefore you get 6 minus 0 first...

the equation rewrites from 6-1x0+2/2 to this (6 - (1 x 0)) + (2 / 2)

additon and subtraction along with multiplication and division are treated at the same precident thats why you MUST do them form left to right...

I am just amazed how so many computer esc people can't grasp at such a simple concept

Uhm...I was merely explaining how someone COULD have come up with 5. It was questioned as to how someone came up with such an answer. I know the what the correct answer is. Next time, try to keep up.

##### Share on other sites
neufuse    3,294

Uhm...I was merely explaining how someone COULD have come up with 5. It was questioned as to how someone came up with such an answer. I know the what the correct answer is. Next time, try to keep up.

and I was explaining I don't get how people could figure out the logic you explained if you knew the rules where left to right, I wasn't saying you did it wrong, wasn't mocking you or anything, just the people who used that method.. I was explaining the correct way and how could someone even think that's the right way and get five... please don't tell me to keep up, I was just saying The people who got it that way where definatly wrong...sheesh

MrA    6

Easy. It's 7?6.

##### Share on other sites
IntegralDerivative    60

7

I solved that in my mind

McCordRm    431

6-1x0+2/2

6-0+2/2

6-0+1

6+1

7

##### Share on other sites
Euphoria    1,938

Unbafkinleavible

##### Share on other sites
-Himanshu-    122

6-1x0+2/2

=6-(1x0)+(2/2)

=6-0+1

=6+1

=7

##### Share on other sites
Mark the spark    0

I found this site after a quick google for the topic equation, and enjoyed the thread.

A quick bit of background, i'm a 53 yr old electrician from the UK, have an IQ of around 140 so no genius but no dummy either :woot: but able to do arithmetic (just about :D )

I can only speak from a UK perspective, but the arrival of so many different answers to this equation boils down to the age gap IMO. You see, most people of my age bracket were simply taught from infant school onwards to simply read the sums from left to right and complete it as you go along, - hence the answer of 3.5.

A tangent to the arrival of 3.5 is that 5 x 0 was taught to equal 5, the logic being applied was that you had 5 to start off with in the first place, therefore 5 times no more would still equal the original 5 that you started with.

Zero times 5 would of course equal zero. So the layout of the sum, and the equation, gives cause for misinterpretation.

Most of these people left school at 14 or 15 so it might be a moment to pause for thought and consider that this age group have been working and paying taxes to subsidise the better education provided today to the younger generation? So calling them thick or stupid just because they are following the education rules that they were taught is a bit rich. (not saying anyone here has indulged in OTT name calling)

The further teaching was to include brackets to give the semblance of order. So the equation would have been written as:

6 - (0 x 1) + (2/2) = ? if one wanted 7 to be arrived at.

Now I've also had to do some brain numbing mathematics as part of electrical theory as the years have gone by, so i'm well aware of the DMAS order of things, the BO part not being seen as important enough to include as it's too obvious really.

I can tell you that a large amount of students religiously follow the order of DMAS as written, so addition often takes place before subtraction, hence the arrival of 5 as an answer.

Then you get the reliance on modern day simple calculators, which give an answer of 1 if you enter the equation as written.

Therefore all modern simple calculators are manufactured wrongly? :whistle: Hmmm... :rolleyes:

There you go, that's my take on it. 7 would be my answer.

Mark.