Math: 6÷2(1+2) = ? | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1034800 United States 01/15/2013 01:58 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | As far as I know, It's brackets first, then multiplication and division (doesn't matter which one first, it's just left to right), then addition. If there's too much confusion, then it's the fault of the person formulating the equation. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1034800 Right, so the result its 1 9 is the correct answer unless the person writing the equation wants to avoid confusion by adding brackets somewhere else. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1034800 WHY you change your mind while you've just write the correct stuff before? 6/2(1+2) Brackets first: 1+2 = 3 Then multiplication and division from left to right Division comes first because it's farthest to the left 6/2=3 So now it's 3(3) 3x3= 9 |
cantlive4ever User ID: 29341887 United States 01/15/2013 01:58 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | (1+2) first(brakets)=3 so now we have x+6/2x3=9 next part is 6/2=3(MD rule Work left to right) so now we have x+3times3=9 next part is 3x3 which equals 9 which gives us x+9=9 to solve for x you will do x=9-9 so x=0 Remember, I made these predictions before I correlated them to the Mayan long count or studied the prophecies of the cleansing. |
The Sonic Dreamer User ID: 19453308 United States 01/15/2013 01:59 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1034800 United States 01/15/2013 02:06 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | As far as I know, It's brackets first, then multiplication and division (doesn't matter which one first, it's just left to right), then addition. If there's too much confusion, then it's the fault of the person formulating the equation. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1034800 Right, so the result its 1 9 is the correct answer unless the person writing the equation wants to avoid confusion by adding brackets somewhere else. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1034800 WHY you change your mind while you've just write the correct stuff before? 6/2(1+2) Brackets first: 1+2 = 3 Then multiplication and division from left to right Division comes first because it's farthest to the left 6/2=3 So now it's 3(3) 3x3= 9 [link to en.wikipedia.org] "Today, parentheses or brackets are used to explicitly denote precedence by grouping parts of an expression that should be evaluated first. Thus, to force addition to precede multiplication, we write (2 + 3) × 4 = 20, and to force addition to precede exponentiation, we write (3 + 5)2 = 64." "The order of operations used throughout mathematics, science, technology and many computer programming languages is expressed here:[2] exponents and roots multiplication and division addition and subtraction" "Mnemonics are often used to help students remember the rules, but the rules taught by the use of acronyms can be misleading. In the United States the acronym PEMDAS is common. It stands for Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction. PEMDAS is often expanded to "Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally" with the first letter of each word creating the acronym PEMDAS. Canada uses BEDMAS and the UK uses BIDMAS or BODMAS. In Canada and other English speaking countries, Parentheses may be called Brackets, or symbols of inclusion and Exponentiation may be called either Indices, Powers or Orders, which have the same precedence as Roots or Radicals. Since multiplication and division are of equal precedence, M and D are often interchanged, leading to such acronyms as BOMDAS. These mnemonics may be misleading when written this way, especially if the user is not aware that multiplication and division are of equal precedence, as are addition and subtraction. Using any of the above rules in the order "addition first, subtraction afterward" would also give the wrong answer to the problem" |
DUCM900 User ID: 32274929 Italy 01/15/2013 02:09 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | (1+2) first(brakets)=3 so now we have x+6/2x3=9 next part is 6/2=3(MD rule Work left to right) so now we have x+3times3=9 next part is 3x3 which equals 9 which gives us x+9=9 to solve for x you will do x=9-9 so x=0 Sorry BUT I use the slash --> / so NOT the ÷ for the division. SO I mean: x+__6__ = 9 ..2(1+2) --->> then:...8...... Last Edited by IWASTHERE on 01/15/2013 02:12 PM |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32099322 Norway 01/15/2013 02:46 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 02:54 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31557420 Holy shit balls you people are FUCKING STUPID. The answer is 9, there is no debate to be had. LMAO yes I am stupid. I scored higher on the Stanford Binet than you could have dreamed, and have more college credits, and am a couple months away from graduating with one of the most difficult 4 year degrees to get, with honors, have gotten A's in every college level math course I have taken, 3 stats, calc 1 and 2, and a couple of others, but yes, I am stupid. Get a life you fucking tard. I am not trying to be a dick, but I am not stupid. And yes, I could probably beat your pansy ass as well, just to add insult to injury. Get off my dick, you are wrong. yawn yawn yawn. What college did you go to? I studied biomedical engineering at Case. I can assure you, you wasted your money on your education if you cannot do such a simple problem. Take your iq score and shove it up your ass you fucking lunatic. But I am willing to give it a rest. If you think you are so right, good for you. I am not going to sit here and argue all day. So it depends how you define, giving it a rest. I will not concede that there are multiple answers, there are not. The answer is 9. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 30946818 United Kingdom 01/15/2013 03:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 03:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | LMAO yes I am stupid. I scored higher on the Stanford Binet than you could have dreamed, and have more college credits, and am a couple months away from graduating with one of the most difficult 4 year degrees to get, with honors, have gotten A's in every college level math course I have taken, 3 stats, calc 1 and 2, and a couple of others, but yes, I am stupid. Quoting: Patrick Bateman Get a life you fucking tard. I am not trying to be a dick, but I am not stupid. And yes, I could probably beat your pansy ass as well, just to add insult to injury. Get off my dick, you are wrong. I did engineering in 4 years, along with learning french as a second language to attain a functional profile, among other things... The answer is 1. Always. That is the ONLY way to get 9. Otherwise, they would have written it 6(2+1)/2. |
Patrick Bateman User ID: 32018985 United States 01/15/2013 04:00 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | LMAO yes I am stupid. I scored higher on the Stanford Binet than you could have dreamed, and have more college credits, and am a couple months away from graduating with one of the most difficult 4 year degrees to get, with honors, have gotten A's in every college level math course I have taken, 3 stats, calc 1 and 2, and a couple of others, but yes, I am stupid. Quoting: Patrick Bateman Get a life you fucking tard. I am not trying to be a dick, but I am not stupid. And yes, I could probably beat your pansy ass as well, just to add insult to injury. Get off my dick, you are wrong. I did engineering in 4 years, along with learning french as a second language to attain a functional profile, among other things... The answer is 1. Always. That is the ONLY way to get 9. Otherwise, they would have written it 6(2+1)/2. Lol, thank you. If you search the thread I have said just that for over a year, lol. Last Edited by Patrick Bateman on 01/15/2013 04:00 PM |
Patrick Bateman User ID: 32018985 United States 01/15/2013 04:02 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Patrick Bateman LMAO yes I am stupid. I scored higher on the Stanford Binet than you could have dreamed, and have more college credits, and am a couple months away from graduating with one of the most difficult 4 year degrees to get, with honors, have gotten A's in every college level math course I have taken, 3 stats, calc 1 and 2, and a couple of others, but yes, I am stupid. Get a life you fucking tard. I am not trying to be a dick, but I am not stupid. And yes, I could probably beat your pansy ass as well, just to add insult to injury. Get off my dick, you are wrong. yawn yawn yawn. What college did you go to? I studied biomedical engineering at Case. I can assure you, you wasted your money on your education if you cannot do such a simple problem. Take your iq score and shove it up your ass you fucking lunatic. But I am willing to give it a rest. If you think you are so right, good for you. I am not going to sit here and argue all day. So it depends how you define, giving it a rest. I will not concede that there are multiple answers, there are not. The answer is 9. Lol wrong, twice. I did not ssay there were multiple answers, I said the problem is poorly written which could lead the the confusion. I have also stated, at least 100 times now, the answer is 1. You want to keep arguing, whatever, I said my piece. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 04:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | First, if you want to say 0.5x, then you HAVE to write (1/2)x with parentheses or, x "all over 2" with a horiztonal fraction bar, or write x/2. I have never seen (1/2)x before I researched this equation, but since searching online, I HAVE seen fractional coefficients written this way, only because computers are limited to the horizontal typing space. Therefore: x/2 = (1/2)x = 0.5x 1/2n = 1/(2n) This sort of notation is used especially with pi, ln, or e. We have never had to say 1/(2pi). It was simply 1/2pi, or 1/2e^2. I have always used ab/cd to mean (ab)/(cd) and I topped almost all of my calculus classes since high school through university.(moot point, I know) Just to re-iterate, to use 6/2 as a fraction, parentheses are REQUIRED. Every book will tell you this. Now consider the Identity Law: a = 1a = 1(a) We know there is ALWAYS an 'invisible' 1 as a ceofficient of a variable if no other number is there. Therefore: a/a = 1, and if a is also 1a, then a/1a = 1. Blindly using 'pemdas', some folks would do this: a/1a = a/1*a = a*a = a^2. I hope this drives home the silliness of this calculation. Now, on to my second point: consider: factoring, simplifying equations, and the distributive property. Lets start with the number 6. 6 = (4+2). There is a common factor here: 2. So let's factor it out of both terms. (4+2) = 2(2+1). The outside 2 remains a part of of the 2 inner terms at all times. It cannot be used in an operation by itself without the rest of (4+2). The reverse of factoring is distribution, so, 2(2+1) = 6. This has to be true always. The argument I have seen to this is that (6/2) can be distributed. This is true ONLY is 6/2 is in parentheses, otherwise, the 6 and 2 are separated by a division slash, and the 2 is a factor of 2+1. So, let's prove the initial equation: 6/6 = 1 6/(4+2) = 1 6/2(2+1) = 1 the same can be done for other factors: 6/6 = 1 6/(3+3) = 1 6/3(1+1) = 1 Distribution is actually a part of "Simplifying Equations" and is not bound to the order of operations as "multiplication", since it is in fact "removing parentheses by distributing". This can be googled and several references found. Simplifying 2(2+1) + 3(2+1) = 5(2+1). We "combined like terms" here, by adding, and did not perform the "parntheses" part of order of operations, nor did we multiply, which is also higher priority than adding, because we only simplified. Lastly, I hear the argument that "This is strictly numbers and you don't use algebra rules since there are no variables". That is the most asinine arguement I have heard yet. All axioms, laws, and properties use variables, meaning that they hold true for "any number", hence the proofs with variables. I welcome thoughts on this, in an intellectually formed response. I am tired of the 'flaming' that goes on by imbciles on some other forums with rebuttals like "it is 9. go back to grade 3 you moron", or "google says it is 9", when google changes the equation to (6/2)*(2+1), and wolfram contradicts itself with 2n/2n = 1, and 6/2n = 3/n, but then says 6/2(2+1) is 9. wolframs "terms" state that any answer should be verified with common sense and accuracy should also be verified. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31557420 yawn yawn yawn. What college did you go to? I studied biomedical engineering at Case. I can assure you, you wasted your money on your education if you cannot do such a simple problem. Take your iq score and shove it up your ass you fucking lunatic. But I am willing to give it a rest. If you think you are so right, good for you. I am not going to sit here and argue all day. So it depends how you define, giving it a rest. I will not concede that there are multiple answers, there are not. The answer is 9. Lol wrong, twice. I did not ssay there were multiple answers, I said the problem is poorly written which could lead the the confusion. I have also stated, at least 100 times now, the answer is 1. You want to keep arguing, whatever, I said my piece. I am not arguing. The answer is 9. There is no debate to be had. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | LMAO yes I am stupid. I scored higher on the Stanford Binet than you could have dreamed, and have more college credits, and am a couple months away from graduating with one of the most difficult 4 year degrees to get, with honors, have gotten A's in every college level math course I have taken, 3 stats, calc 1 and 2, and a couple of others, but yes, I am stupid. Quoting: Patrick Bateman Get a life you fucking tard. I am not trying to be a dick, but I am not stupid. And yes, I could probably beat your pansy ass as well, just to add insult to injury. Get off my dick, you are wrong. I did engineering in 4 years, along with learning french as a second language to attain a functional profile, among other things... The answer is 1. Always. That is the ONLY way to get 9. Otherwise, they would have written it 6(2+1)/2. My God the stupidity is absolutely fucking mind boggling. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:13 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | LMAO yes I am stupid. I scored higher on the Stanford Binet than you could have dreamed, and have more college credits, and am a couple months away from graduating with one of the most difficult 4 year degrees to get, with honors, have gotten A's in every college level math course I have taken, 3 stats, calc 1 and 2, and a couple of others, but yes, I am stupid. Quoting: Patrick Bateman Get a life you fucking tard. I am not trying to be a dick, but I am not stupid. And yes, I could probably beat your pansy ass as well, just to add insult to injury. Get off my dick, you are wrong. I did engineering in 4 years, along with learning french as a second language to attain a functional profile, among other things... The answer is 1. Always. That is the ONLY way to get 9. Otherwise, they would have written it 6(2+1)/2. My God the stupidity is absolutely fucking mind boggling. You guys seriously need to tell me where you got your degrees. I need to make sure my kids never set foot in that fucking institution: "For instance, 15 ÷ 3 × 4 is not 15 ÷ 12, but is rather 5 × 4, because, going from left to right, you get to the division first." [link to www.purplemath.com] It is so fucking simple it is unreal... absolutely fucking unreal. I just cannot even comprehend how your minds are this fucked up. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 04:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 04:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "For instance, 15 ÷ 3 × 4 is not 15 ÷ 12, but is rather 5 × 4, because, going from left to right, you get to the division first." Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31557420 [link to www.purplemath.com] It is so fucking simple it is unreal... absolutely fucking unreal. I just cannot even comprehend how your minds are this fucked up. You sir, are the fucked up one. Continue reading your URL: "When simplifying expressions with parentheses, you will be applying the Distributive Property." -purplemath |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 04:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "Parentheses" in the order of operations to require Distributive Property. Ref: Purplemath [link to www.purplemath.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 30287813 United States 01/15/2013 04:21 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "For instance, 15 ÷ 3 × 4 is not 15 ÷ 12, but is rather 5 × 4, because, going from left to right, you get to the division first." Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31557420 [link to www.purplemath.com] It is so fucking simple it is unreal... absolutely fucking unreal. I just cannot even comprehend how your minds are this fucked up. You sir, are the fucked up one. Continue reading your URL: "When simplifying expressions with parentheses, you will be applying the Distributive Property." -purplemath OMG. OMG. OMG. OMG. PLEASE JUST FUCKING OPEN YOUR BRAIN, AND LEARN SOMETHING! There is no separate term, YOU DO NOT DO THE DISTRIBUTIVE PROPERTY! THIS IS NOT A FUCKING FRACTION! Fucking learn something dude. JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. Let this man explain to your STUPID fucking mind even more clearly because I don't have the patience to deal with MENTALLY FUCKING RETARDED morons. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "Parentheses" in the order of operations to require Distributive Property. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32057798 Ref: Purplemath [link to www.purplemath.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "Parentheses" in the order of operations to require Distributive Property. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32057798 Ref: Purplemath [link to www.purplemath.com] More explanation: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31519086 Australia 01/15/2013 04:31 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 20566260 United States 01/15/2013 04:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 31557420 United States 01/15/2013 04:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I have a bachelors degree in horticulture, and I can tell you the answer is 9. I used tomato plants to represent the numbers, and the answer is definitely 9. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 30287813 were the tomato plants inside or outside??? stupid question. The tomato plants have been inside since 2010. |
Annonymous User ID: 15620845 Belgium 01/15/2013 04:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | First, Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32057798 if you want to say 0.5x, then you HAVE to write (1/2)x with parentheses or, x "all over 2" with a horiztonal fraction bar, or write x/2. I have never seen (1/2)x before I researched this equation, but since searching online, I HAVE seen fractional coefficients written this way, only because computers are limited to the horizontal typing space. Therefore: x/2 = (1/2)x = 0.5x 1/2n = 1/(2n) This sort of notation is used especially with pi, ln, or e. We have never had to say 1/(2pi). It was simply 1/2pi, or 1/2e^2. I have always used ab/cd to mean (ab)/(cd) and I topped almost all of my calculus classes since high school through university.(moot point, I know) Just to re-iterate, to use 6/2 as a fraction, parentheses are REQUIRED. Every book will tell you this. Now consider the Identity Law: a = 1a = 1(a) We know there is ALWAYS an 'invisible' 1 as a ceofficient of a variable if no other number is there. Therefore: a/a = 1, and if a is also 1a, then a/1a = 1. Blindly using 'pemdas', some folks would do this: a/1a = a/1*a = a*a = a^2. I hope this drives home the silliness of this calculation. Now, on to my second point: consider: factoring, simplifying equations, and the distributive property. Lets start with the number 6. 6 = (4+2). There is a common factor here: 2. So let's factor it out of both terms. (4+2) = 2(2+1). The outside 2 remains a part of of the 2 inner terms at all times. It cannot be used in an operation by itself without the rest of (4+2). The reverse of factoring is distribution, so, 2(2+1) = 6. This has to be true always. The argument I have seen to this is that (6/2) can be distributed. This is true ONLY is 6/2 is in parentheses, otherwise, the 6 and 2 are separated by a division slash, and the 2 is a factor of 2+1. So, let's prove the initial equation: 6/6 = 1 6/(4+2) = 1 6/2(2+1) = 1 the same can be done for other factors: 6/6 = 1 6/(3+3) = 1 6/3(1+1) = 1 Distribution is actually a part of "Simplifying Equations" and is not bound to the order of operations as "multiplication", since it is in fact "removing parentheses by distributing". This can be googled and several references found. Simplifying 2(2+1) + 3(2+1) = 5(2+1). We "combined like terms" here, by adding, and did not perform the "parntheses" part of order of operations, nor did we multiply, which is also higher priority than adding, because we only simplified. Lastly, I hear the argument that "This is strictly numbers and you don't use algebra rules since there are no variables". That is the most asinine arguement I have heard yet. All axioms, laws, and properties use variables, meaning that they hold true for "any number", hence the proofs with variables. I welcome thoughts on this, in an intellectually formed response. I am tired of the 'flaming' that goes on by imbciles on some other forums with rebuttals like "it is 9. go back to grade 3 you moron", or "google says it is 9", when google changes the equation to (6/2)*(2+1), and wolfram contradicts itself with 2n/2n = 1, and 6/2n = 3/n, but then says 6/2(2+1) is 9. wolframs "terms" state that any answer should be verified with common sense and accuracy should also be verified. . 10/10! Distribution is the key word here. |
Matrix-V User ID: 31575117 Canada 01/15/2013 04:45 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 04:50 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 32057798 Canada 01/15/2013 04:52 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |