Solve 48

[rfirth]

Do you need to distribute in order to solve the expression in parentheses?

If so then the very first expression that is calculated by priority of Parentheses is 2(9+3) or (2 x 9 + 2 x3). The fundamental question is can the 9 and 3 be added together without factoring in the 2?

You can't do that (distribute) because the precedence of MULT and DIV is the same and should be evaluated from left to right. And no, it is not necessary to distribute in order to solve the expression in parentheses.

After you evaulate (9+3), you get (12). (12) evaulates to 12. Then it's just 48/2*12.

[primexx]

I'm talking about parenthesis around 48/2. The convention in parentheses is on top of juxtaposition precedence. If it seems ambiguous this is how we resolve it. The need to put parentheses in the denominator comes when the denominator is composed of addition elements. e.g. 48/[2(9+3) + 18 + 6] = 1 whereas 48/2(9+3) + 18 + 6 = 26.

If you didn't put parentheses then it's not meant to be there, on top of other conventions/rules. If I meant (48/2)(9+3) I would have written 48(9+3)/2.

wth are you talking about? that makes no sense in any way.

[Jebadiah]

This thread shows that computer science degree is useless :D

LOL There is no excuse for lacking basic knowledge in math and applying bad logic.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

Left-to-right is not mathematically correct. If you ever need to rely on left-to-right, something is wrong and you need more brackets in the original question, or solve it in another way.

It's left-to-right to some extent but there is still an order of operations. Brackets are solved first, followed by exponents, then division/multiplication (equal weight), then addition/subjection (equal weight). It's not just "whatever comes first is solved first."

I still don't think the question is that unclear.

2(9+3) cannot be interpreted as one "token" if you will because there are no brackets to dictate that it should be. Therefore you need to perform the 48/2 BEFORE getting to (9+3)

[rfirth]

You know what? Forget it. When in doubt, add more parentheses. It's a trick question :p

The real issue here:

32 / 2 * 16 = 256

32 / 2 (16) = 1 or 256, depending on who you ask. I would say 256 based on the interpretation that this is equivalent to 32 / 2 * 16. WolframAlpha and most graphing calculators agree with me.

[Syanide]

You know what? Forget it. When in doubt, add more parentheses. It's a trick question :p

The real issue here:

32 / 2 * 16 = 256

32 / 2 (16) = 1 or 256, depending on who you ask. I would say 256 based on the interpretation that this is equivalent to 32 / 2 * 16.

:facepalm:

How can it be anything other than 256? It's the same issue I've explained earlier. Since there are no brackets that would group 2 and 16, basic maths imply you do 32/2 first.

32:2*16 = 256

OR

32

-- * 16 = 256

2

THE END.

[Ambroos]

2(9+3) cannot be interpreted as one "token" if you will because there are no brackets to dictate that it should be. Therefore you need to perform the 48/2 BEFORE getting to (9+3)

It can be interpreted as one "token". It is a generally accepted convention that multiplication implied by juxtaposition (placing the 2 in front of (9+3) without * or x) should be executed before other multiplications/divisions.

I hate mathematics. Solving something using left to right is just grrbleh.

[rfirth]

:facepalm:

How can it be anything other than 256? It's the same issue I've explained earlier. Since there are no brackets that would group 2 and 16, basic maths imply you do 32/2 first.

32:2*16 = 256

OR

32

-- * 16 = 256

2

THE END.

I know, and I agree with you. The problem came when I did some research. There are several sources that say multiplication that is implied by parenthesis, like 2(4) = 8, has higher precedence than normal multiplication, like 2x4 = 8. I think that is nonsense, but read the wikipedia article on the order of operations:

"Some mathematicians hold that multiplication by juxtaposition (omitting the x sign, ex. 2(4+3) ) is a symbol of grouping. No fixed convention exists."

Note that it says that no fixed convention exists. That basically means that the behavior of the equation that we were asked to solve (48/2(9+3)) is undefined, although in order to match the normal convention, it should (in my opinion, and apparently in the opinion of the creators of WolframAlpha and most graphing calculators) evaluate to 288. I think this silly juxtaposition rule is silly and creates unnecessary confusion.

[Versanis]

I, for one, will not live in a world where multiplying an arbitrary term by 1 changes the answer.

Multiplying by 1 never changes an answer. In the example you gave to prove it though, you should have added parenthesis since you broke 1 entity into 2.

(2*1) should have been what you got or (1*2).

Otherwise the equation becomes entirely dependant on which term you place first, which is obviously flawed logic.

e.g. 2?2 = 1

2?1*2 = 4

2?2*1 = 1

[Klownicle]

How are there 16 pages to this post... :laugh:

Its math, not politics.

[XerXis]

I think we can all agree to disagree. The way this equation is written is open to various interpretations, therefore inline equations are the devil!

[Ambroos]

Note that it says that no fixed convention exists. That basically means that the behavior of the equation that we were asked to solve (48/2(9+3)) is undefined, although in order to match the normal convention, it should (in my opinion, and apparently in the opinion of the creators of WolframAlpha and most graphing calculators) evaluate to 288. I think this silly juxtaposition rule is silly and creates unnecessary confusion.

That juxtaposition rule is pure logic if you're used to algebra.

[XerXis]

That juxtaposition rule is pure logic if you're used to algebra.

Yes, but it's not generally accepted in an equation like this, that much is clear

[Hardcore Til I Die]

It can be interpreted as one "token". It is a generally accepted convention that multiplication implied by juxtaposition (placing the 2 in front of (9+3) without * or x) should be executed before other multiplications/divisions.

I hate mathematics. Solving something using left to right is just grrbleh.

"generally accepted" by who? I have never heard of that rule.

I know they only teach basic maths in High School but that doesn't mean they teach incorrect maths. Why would they teach the BODMAS rule at the point where everybody is taught basic maths if it's incorrect; they would be helping to set up a nation of idiots :p

[webeagle12]

lol

[zeta_immersion]

Fixed it for you. :)

Thank you, was at work after a 12h shift and could not find the buttons.

On a side note, really? is this a math problem? ... there are so many other interesting math problems out there than addition/subtraction (don't mean to hijack the thread but 17 pages, a bit unwarranted).

[Hardcore Til I Die]

lol

Hahaha was waiting for something like that to show up :laugh:

[bionary1]

18 minutes ago

ok. seeing as i got this to be both answers, heres what each side is doing.

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

this is where the split occurs, if you take it as a left to right equation, as some calculators will, it will be 48 divided by two times twelve, thus: (48/2)(12) thus giving you 288

however, if you take it as everything after the division sighn is under the division sighn

48

___

2(12)

this will give you 48/24, and thus 2.

This problem can be taken either way. As some people have already pointed out. its too ambigous. like the question: How many times did you kill it with? Theres no right or wrong, just several possible anwers.

Ikknow this is from TBK at knowyourmeme.com, but so what?

This all has to do with however you were taught, there isnt a true anwer. I was taught anything outside parenthesis is a co-efficient, and thus was connected to parenthesis, thus taking priority over division. This is too ambigout, you either assume that everythings under the braket, or only the 2 is, either way, your assuming

[Conjor]

18 minutes ago

ok. seeing as i got this to be both answers, heres what each side is doing.

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

this is where the split occurs, if you take it as a left to right equation, as some calculators will, it will be 48 divided by two times twelve, thus: (48/2)(12) thus giving you 288

however, if you take it as everything after the division sighn is under the division sighn

48

___

2(12)

this will give you 48/24, and thus 2.

This problem can be taken either way. As some people have already pointed out. its too ambigous. like the question: How many times did you kill it with? Theres no right or wrong, just several possible anwers.

Ikknow this is from TBK at knowyourmeme.com, but so what?

This all has to do with however you were taught, there isnt a true anwer. I was taught anything outside parenthesis is a co-efficient, and thus was connected to parenthesis, thus taking priority over division. This is too ambigout, you either assume that everythings under the braket, or only the 2 is, either way, your assuming

No, it is not ambiguous. Math is designed to be sound and should leave no room for interpretation, especially on a trivial subject such as this.

The answer is 288 - anyone with any mathematical background will tell you that. Stop trolling and learn some math.

[LaP]

Rule 1: First perform any calculations inside parentheses.

Rule 2: Next perform all multiplications and divisions, working from left to right.

Rule 3: Lastly, perform all additions and subtractions, working from left to right.

[LaP]

but I've never been taught that there was any difference between 2(9+3) and 2*(9+3).

There's supposed to be one i think.

Last time i did math was A LONG time a go. It was Math for engineering 2 using the Advanced engineering mathematics book seventh edition.

If i remember correctly when you write 2(something) it will always be done first. I might be wrong it was like 10 years ago and i've never done math again after i graduated.

[ArKeYa]

No, it is not ambiguous. Math is designed to be sound and should leave no room for interpretation, especially on a trivial subject such as this.

The answer is 288 - anyone with any mathematical background will tell you that. Stop trolling and learn some math.

Strong words you have there. That means I have no mathematical background and need to learn some math? After winning numerous math contests in highschool and an engineering graduate you think I still need to learn some math?

You think juxtaposition is just a load of bs we use to troll this thread?

[Ubermind]

I think this is where the split occur:

[Disorient]

let x=(9+3)

now reads 48?2x

this is never mistaken as 24x so why are so many people fighting the juxtaposition

[Argi]

Hrm, whoever asked this question originally should come back to clarify and add more brackets and there wouldn't be any confusion!