48÷2(9+3) = ????

[Razi]

Fossils were planted by the Jews!

Isn't that why the internet was invented?

Nope, it was invented for (p0rn).

Keeping on topic, notice the parenthesis suggesting that p0rn be calculated first BEFORE other items.

[Papi Chulo]

the answer is 69

[S13_love]

Edit: Oops, nevermind...I definitely botched that.

[PEZi]

pemdas /thread

this is kinda old news at this point... following true pemdas format... you can't fail

[S13_love]

Ugh...wow...didn't catch how poorly that question is written.

For it to be 2, it has to be 48/[2(9+3)]

As for 288, it has to be 48/2 x (9+3)

to the a**hat that wrote it as 48/2(9+3).

....*sigh*....I hate these kind of ambiguous questions.


Edit: Body building forums never cease to amaze me:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthrea ... 73&page=84

84 pages!

[RCA]

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29

/thread

[flohtingPoint]

I love how this is sweeping forums. Really makes me wonder if we're going to make it as a species. This is 6th grade math folks, not something that's supposed to stump adults. Honestly, all the folks that have propagated this throughout the internet, how have you not died from other stupid s*** like slamming your dong in the microwave and hitting 8 minutes on high? If you cant figure it out because two different calculators are explaining what I'm saying, I'm conveying that you're retarded.

[snwbrdr435]

I love how this is sweeping forums. Really makes me wonder if we're going to make it as a species. This is 6th grade math folks, not something that's supposed to stump adults. Honestly, all the folks that have propagated this throughout the internet, how have you not died from other stupid s*** like slamming your dong in the microwave and hitting 8 minutes on high? If you cant figure it out because two different calculators are explaining what I'm saying, I'm conveying that you're retarded.

[themadscientist]

My answer? I have sex with women and own a skyline, you do do math; geek.

[sx moneypit]

My answer? I have sex with women and own a skyline, you do do math; geek.

[AppleBonker]

to the a**hat that wrote it as 48/2(9+3).

....*sigh*....I hate these kind of ambiguous questions.

It isn't that ambiguous though. What does 2(4) mean? It is understood that it is 2*(4). So in this case, it would be understood that we are asking for 48/2*(9+3). I'm not sure what makes this so confusing for people?

Edit: Body building forums never cease to amaze me:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthrea ... 73&page=84

84 pages!

I lolled at the first few pages...

[carloslebaron]

48÷2(9+3)

simplified as an exponential expression

x^48
___________= ~2^288
+ 2 / 9y^3."

[alms24sebring]

Also,

Ok wow, I dont know how to even explain this. 2nd, I didnt know they made a TI 85/86

Ive always learned PEMDAS to do muliplication and division at the same time as you go left to right. Not M first then D. Just like A and S as you go left to right.

I thought it was 2 at first. So then I did it on a TI 83, 83+, and a 89 and all came up as 288. But I also have a cheap $10 Casio calculator that says something different, that being 2 as you can see.





Excuse the crappy pics from a crappy cheap flip phone with no flash. Its my beater phone

So, what IS the answer??? I am seriously ganna send this to my math teacher. Shes really good at math and I will see what she says.

[tigersharkdude]

I dont feel like arguing but Im going to throw my 2 cents out there

In all of my math knowledge, I remember that whenever parenthesis around equation and there is a number directly beside it, you figure out the answer inside the parenthesis and multiply by the the number that is directly to the right/left

So in the equation 48÷2(9+3)=
48÷2(12)
48÷24
=2

EDIT: this website says 48÷2(9+3)==2.....http://www.mathway.com/answer.aspx?p=ca ... ?p=0?p=?p=
while....48÷2*(9+3)==288.....http://www.mathway.com/answer.aspx?p=ca ... ?p=0?p=?p=

I knew I was right

[Ron Burgundy]

This thread is one giant facepalm but I can't help but post in it!

Everyone's said it already but to reiterate:

theres no such thing as dividing, there is only multiplying by a reciprocal, you're using imaginary algebraic operators, y0.

Uh, kind of. Division indeed exists, it is the inverse of multiplication. The division sign (÷) simply tends to fade away after elemetary arithmatic. In digital computation, the forward slash (/) is used to denote right division.

The product of c and b is equal to a; c times b equals a.
c x b = a

Therefore, a divided by b is equal to c.
a/b = c

48 ÷ 2 = 48/2 = 48 x (1/2) = 48 x 0.5 = 24

...P.E.M.D.A.S...

Misleading acronyms are misleading.

While acronyms are a helpful memory aid, they're of no use if you don't know what you're trying to remember.

Order of operations, or precedence, clarifies which operations are to be preformed first in a given mathematical equation consisting of multiple operators. The standard order of operations is as follows:

1. Calculate all terms insde brackets or parentheses; parentheses can be used to group terms and operations to, quote/unquote defy, the order of operations.
2. Carry out all exponents and roots.
3. Multiplication and division are interchangable; remember division is the inverse of multiplication.
4. Addition and subtraction are again interchangable; think of subtraction as the addition of the opposite.

Just to further reinforce the interchangeability of multiplication and division (which seems to be the issue of our particular equation), why P.E.M.D.A.S. can be misleading, and the associative and communitive properties...

While P.E.M.D.A.S. may be the common acronym of choice taught in the U.S., many other countries use the acronym B.E.D.M.A.S. (Brackets, Exponents, Division, Multiplication, Addition, Subtraction). Ignoring the interchangability of multiplication and division, and addition and subtraction would result in conflicting answers depending on the acronym you chose to religiously and inappropriately abide by. In basic mathematics, as we have here, conflicting answers do not exist.

Onto our given equation (as originally written) is:

48÷2(9+3)

For the sake of digital computation, we will switch out the division symbol, for the forward slash rewriting the equation as follows:

48/2(9+3)

Following standard order of operations we calculate all terms inside the parentheses:

48/2(12)

And just to be clear, we will once again rewrite as follows:

48/2 x (12)

This is obviously where some of us are getting confused. Lets start by cleary defining each term by asigning parentheses:

(48)/(2) x (12)

Assigning variables:

(a)/(b) x (c)

Where (b), and (b) alone, is the only interger in the denominator. In order for c to be considered as part of the divisor (denominator) it would need to be placed within the same parentheses as (b). Allowing us to "defy" the order of operations and carry out all operations inside the parentheses (b x c). However, in this particular equation, this is not the case.

Rewrite equation as text:

the product of of (a) divided by (b), and (c)
or
(a) divided by (b) times (c) (not to be confused with (a) divided by the product of (b) and (c)
or
(a) times the reciprocol of (b) times (c) (not to be confused with (a) divided by the product of the reciprocol of (b) and (c)


Evaluate division as the multiplication of the recipricol:

(a) x (1/(b)) x (c)

Evaulate at a=48, b=2, c=12; Remember to follow order of operations:

(48) x (1/(2)) x (12)
288




CLIFF NOTES: The correct, and only correct, answer for the given equation is 288. Way to much time and effort spent explaining how and why. I have no life.
PROOF: Basic mathematics.

[alms24sebring]

Nice writeup and explaination. But why does my calculator still tell me 2? I assume the calculator reads division as inverse multiplication and all the same laws apply.

and by your other explanaton of adding and subtracting, I think your saying for example 5-2=3, is the same thing as 5+(-2)=3, which is true. But is that how computers think of it to make all equations addition of a pos or neg number?; like 10/2=5 is is the same as 10*(1/2)=5, keeping it simpler to just addition and multiplication??

[Ron Burgundy]

Nice writeup and explaination. But why does my calculator still tell me 2? I assume the calculator reads division as inverse multiplication and all the same laws apply.

and by your other explanaton of adding and subtracting, I think your saying for example 5-2=3, is the same thing as 5+(-2)=3, which is true. But is that how computers think of it to make all equations addition of a pos or neg number?; like 10/2=5 is is the same as 10*(1/2)=5, keeping it simpler to just addition and multiplication??

It's called "Implied Multiplication" your Casio (and probably most Casios) is programmed to give higher precedence to implied multiplication over explicit multiplication.

Type the following into your Casio (where < > simply represents the actual button your press):
<4> <8> <÷> <2> <x> <(> <9> <+> <3> <)> <=>

The above example will eliminate Casio's implied multiplication precedence and give you the correct answer of 288.

From TI:
"Implied multiplication has a higher priority than explicit multiplication to allow users to enter expressions, in the same manner as they would be written. For example, the TI-80, TI-81, TI-82, and TI-85 evaluate 1/2X as 1/(2*X), while other products may evaluate the same expression as 1/2*X from left to right. Without this feature, it would be necessary to group 2X in parentheses, something that is typically not done when writing the expression on paper.

This order of precedence was changed for the TI-83 family, TI-84 Plus family, TI-89 family, TI-92 Plus, Voyage™ 200 and the TI-Nspire™ Handheld in TI-84 Plus Mode. Implied and explicit multiplication is given the same priority."

Why you ask? The principal of implied multiplication clearly has its purpose, but currently has zero credibility as a higher precendence operation in basic arithmatic.

Why Casio hasn't acknowledged this is beyond me! Or perhaps they have? Does anyone have a Casio <2 or 3 years old?

Item of note: the TI-80, TI-81, TI-82, and TI-85 are all discontinued products of Texas Instruments

... Just sayin'

[tigersharkdude]

My TI-83 says 2 when wrote this way

48÷2(9+3)

and says 288 when wrote this way

48÷2*(9+3)

All im saying is that when you are working variables you would follow path A

In this question you multiply by two everything in parenthesis by 2, not by 24

48÷2(x+3)
48÷(2x+6)

[Bmore-coupe]

Ron Burgundy has won the thread.

GAME OVER

[AppleBonker]

Ron Burgundy has won the thread.

GAME OVER

[Dattebayo]

Ugh...wow...didn't catch how poorly that question is written.

For it to be 2, it has to be 48/[2(9+3)]

As for 288, it has to be 48/2 x (9+3)

to the a**hat that wrote it as 48/2(9+3).

It is acceptable to put a number next to parenthesis and have it's proximity used as meaning multiplication in some circles. I remember that from my silly algebra class from back in 8th grade, amazing for a drunk like me!

[Encryptshun]

Ugh...wow...didn't catch how poorly that question is written.

For it to be 2, it has to be 48/[2(9+3)]

As for 288, it has to be 48/2 x (9+3)

to the a**hat that wrote it as 48/2(9+3).

It is acceptable to put a number next to parenthesis and have it's proximity used as meaning multiplication in some circles. I remember that from my silly algebra class from back in 8th grade, amazing for a drunk like me!

48/2(9+3) =
48/2(12)=
24(12)=
288

That "a**hat" would be me. And Dave is exactly right. 2(a), where (a) is any number, means you perform a multiplication action.

[sbird1]

I cannot believe that this thread (and others like it) exist and are so long. What the hell is so hard about this? For you 33% that got a 7th grade math question wrong, STOP RUINING AMERICA.

EDIT: Sorry, this isn't a 7th grade question, it's more along the lines of a 5th grade question. Dear America, stop being so stupid.

[Dittoz7]

Delete this gawd damn thread before PMQ sees it!

[alms24sebring]

Ron Burgundy has won the thread.

GAME OVER

agreed

Thats a great point and I think thats exactly right. TSdude my 83 always says 288 no matter what

I guess that answers my question of why in the 89 it automatically inserts a * (just a dot for muliplication), when it shows the equation you want. It always reads 48/2 dot (9+3). Its the same for variables. 10x would read 10 dot x. Its a nice way to avoid this mistake although the downside to this makes it look complicated for long equations, not including parenthesis. I love to hate my TI89 haha.

[Dattebayo]

You mean delete PMQ before this this thread sees him...

[sbird1]

Either-or.... both wouldn't be bad either.

[krimsonviper]

Delete this gawd damn thread before PMQ sees it!

[Crunkrich]

it all depends on if the reader interprets the / sign as a division sign: 48÷2(9+3) = 288. Or a fraction sign: 48 -over- 2(9+3) = 2.

The original question had a ÷ sign, so the answer is 288.

If the original question had a / sign, it depends on how that sign is interpreted. I'd still say its equal to 288 because it is not written as a fraction.


I've seen this crap on 4 different forums now, its ridiculous. I could have given that same answer^ in grade school.

[PantherRacer]

PEDMAS? I learnt BODMAS. Same thing apparently, but you silly americans have to do everything different huh? lol