6/2(1+2) = X
Solve for X.
Because this is a big controversy at the moment.
6/2(1+2) = X
It can't be properly interpreted as written. Is that supposed to be:
6
-------------
2 * (1 + 2)
Or is it
6
-- * (1 + 2)
2
As written it could be either one and therefor has no specific answer. Or, if you prefer, has two equally valid answers.
Edited By TPRJones on 1333119803
6
-------------
2 * (1 + 2)
Or is it
6
-- * (1 + 2)
2
As written it could be either one and therefor has no specific answer. Or, if you prefer, has two equally valid answers.
Edited By TPRJones on 1333119803
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
And here's another answer:
6 / 2(1+2)
6 / (2+4)
6 / 6
1
I just pulled out of a big ol' flamewar on Fark because 99% of them were saying, "The answer is 9, it couldn't be more clear," and I was saying that the original question was written sloppily, and there is room for interpretation.
- edit - I guess that isn't another answer, I just rewrote yours.
But still. Flamewar over math, on Fark.
Edited By GORDON on 1333120095
6 / 2(1+2)
6 / (2+4)
6 / 6
1
I just pulled out of a big ol' flamewar on Fark because 99% of them were saying, "The answer is 9, it couldn't be more clear," and I was saying that the original question was written sloppily, and there is room for interpretation.
- edit - I guess that isn't another answer, I just rewrote yours.
But still. Flamewar over math, on Fark.
Edited By GORDON on 1333120095
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
.... but 6 is not a valid answer at all! There's no way it can be 6 no matter which way you interpret it. It can either be 1 or 9, but not 6.
Fark are stupid.
EDIT: Wait, I could swear you said 6 there. Okay, yeah, 9 is a valid choice. Fark are less stupid, but still a little stupid.
Edited By TPRJones on 1333120135
Fark are stupid.
EDIT: Wait, I could swear you said 6 there. Okay, yeah, 9 is a valid choice. Fark are less stupid, but still a little stupid.
Edited By TPRJones on 1333120135
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
If it were written as 6÷2*(1+2) then they would be right. Order of operations would imply that you would interpret it as 9. However the slanted nature of / for the division sign which can imply that everything to the right is a divisor coupled with the lack of specific inclusion of the multiplications sign to provide clearer separation between the 2 and the (1+2) results in it being open to a bit of interpretation.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
6/2(1+2) = X
Math was always my weakest subject as I find it insanely boring, but my first impression of that equation was that the solution was 9.
6 divided by 2 is 3, 1+2 is 3, 3x3 is 9.
6 / 2(1+2)
6 / (2+4)
6 / 6
1
I always thought you had to do the math outside of the parentheses first...?
Since editing is the thing here...I think the last time I touched this stuff was 7th grade.
Edited By Leisher on 1333120928
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Math fail. Parentheses come first, always.
Gordon over thought the problem by multiplying 2x1 then 2x2 to come up with (2+4). The only time you do that type of 'double multiplying' is if there are variables in there 2(a+b) = 2a+2b, so that you can continue to solve for one or more of them. Otherwise, you do the parenthesis first. 2(3)=6. Yes the answer is the same no matter which way you do it, but technically, you did break the order of operations.
It is of my opinion that the question does not have enough information to definitively say if it is 1 or 9.
And I love math. Math is awesome. Math was one of my favorite subjects because it is what it is. There's no room for interpretation. Where history, English, etc was all about convincing someone you knew what you were talking about. So, math is easy and straight forward. I liked science for the same reason.
Gordon over thought the problem by multiplying 2x1 then 2x2 to come up with (2+4). The only time you do that type of 'double multiplying' is if there are variables in there 2(a+b) = 2a+2b, so that you can continue to solve for one or more of them. Otherwise, you do the parenthesis first. 2(3)=6. Yes the answer is the same no matter which way you do it, but technically, you did break the order of operations.
It is of my opinion that the question does not have enough information to definitively say if it is 1 or 9.
And I love math. Math is awesome. Math was one of my favorite subjects because it is what it is. There's no room for interpretation. Where history, English, etc was all about convincing someone you knew what you were talking about. So, math is easy and straight forward. I liked science for the same reason.
The problem here is not that the math is vague, but that the way it is written it is not really math problem.
It's like asking someone a history question: "what important event happened on 12175"? Is that 12/1/1975 or 1/21/0075, or what? Until you clarify that date, it's not yet a history question.
It's like asking someone a history question: "what important event happened on 12175"? Is that 12/1/1975 or 1/21/0075, or what? Until you clarify that date, it's not yet a history question.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Math fail. Parentheses come first, always.
Dammit.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
I wasn't overthinking it, I was saying that the problem, as stated, is vague.Cakedaddy wrote:Math fail. Parentheses come first, always.
Gordon over thought the problem by multiplying 2x1 then 2x2 to come up with (2+4). The only time you do that type of 'double multiplying' is if there are variables in there 2(a+b) = 2a+2b, so that you can continue to solve for one or more of them. Otherwise, you do the parenthesis first. 2(3)=6. Yes the answer is the same no matter which way you do it, but technically, you did break the order of operations.
It is of my opinion that the question does not have enough information to definitively say if it is 1 or 9.
Farkers were trying to say that it wasn't vague at all, and was obvious. They are stupid and wrong.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
What do you think the answer to this problem is?Cakedaddy wrote:Gordon over thought the problem by multiplying 2x1 then 2x2 to come up with (2+4).
(3 + x)(4 + 2x)
Because the answer to that is why the problem, as stated, is vague. If you understand how to do the above problem, then you understand why there may not be a definitive answer to the original question, and "Order of Operations" may not apply, as taught up through the 6th grade.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
-
thibodeaux
- Posts: 8056
- Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm
You're wrong. The answer is the same because it's the same. "Order of operations" doesn't matter because multiplication is distributive over addition. And it's not called "double multiplying," is called "distribution."Cakedaddy wrote:Math fail. Parentheses come first, always.
Gordon over thought the problem by multiplying 2x1 then 2x2 to come up with (2+4). The only time you do that type of 'double multiplying' is if there are variables in there 2(a+b) = 2a+2b, so that you can continue to solve for one or more of them. Otherwise, you do the parenthesis first. 2(3)=6. Yes the answer is the same no matter which way you do it, but technically, you did break the order of operations.
It's not "math fail" to distribute over constants, it's just not usually very useful.
-
thibodeaux
- Posts: 8056
- Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm