48÷2(9+3) - Page 3

Dave_Obsession · 15-04-2011, 02:21 PM

Should have had a poll in this thread...

TZENU · 15-04-2011, 02:25 PM

My answer is 2.... But i'm an accountant and am always right!!!

**Polyal** · 15-04-2011, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave93761

Should have had a poll in this thread...

LOL...I would be torn now with the answer...if we HAD to answer it as its directly written then I guess id stay with 288...but as my last post, written "correctly" I get 2

Im sure a mod can put one in

Kryton · 15-04-2011, 02:29 PM

Google say 288.
Google knows all.

ST · 15-04-2011, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

Those cal answers are interesting..the old TI-83 I have gets the following:

48/2(9+3) = 288

BUT, same calc but with the notation that I was taught:

48/(2(9+3)) = 2 - while the question didn't have the bracket infront of the 2 originally this is how I was taught to write it.

Occam's Razor.

351@GT · 15-04-2011, 02:35 PM

48
--------------- = 2 as opposed to
2(9+3)

48
---------------- x (9+3) = 288
2

to me is reads as the first because the 2 is linked to the brackets as one unit. ( my 15yr old casio gets 2 also )

if it had a x between the 2 and the brackets then they are seperate and i would be 288, ie 48/2x(9+3) = 288

written as 48/2(9+3) then the brackets are linked to the 2 and therefore the answer is 2.

Rodp · 15-04-2011, 02:38 PM

Stolen from the original thread.

I read the question as X2. After reading a whole lot of responses, I believe the answer can be obtained both ways due to the ambiguity of how the question is notated.

To me, both answers are valid due to the ambiguity of the question.

**Bluepower** · 15-04-2011, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

No but age usually means you went to school a long time ago before calculators and had to do this type of maths over and over again.

Education policy changes and you are a product of your education.

Most young people I know can't drive a manual crash box car with no power steering or aircon either.
Not because they are not smart enough but because they have never had to and therefore never really learned how or practiced it.

The one thing about age and knowlege that seems universal is the you must get dumber as you get older.

Teenagers know EVERYTHING and EVERYTHING.
In your 20s you know MOST things.
In your 30s you think you know a lot about some things.
In your 40s you think you know a fair bit about some things.

Above that you start to realise that you really don't know much about many things and almost nothing about most things AND NEVER DID.........

The sad thing is that until you are old you will never know just how much you did not really understand......

One of the most wise posts I have ever seen on a forum.

Falc'man · 15-04-2011, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

Stolen from the original thread.

I read the question as X2. After reading a whole lot of responses, I believe the answer can be obtained both ways due to the ambiguity of how the question is notated.

To me, both answers are valid due to the ambiguity of the question.

Having no multiplication sign between the "2" and the bracket means you multiply first - that's how I read it anyway. Like you I read it the correct way.

MITCHAY · 15-04-2011, 02:53 PM

I like to think of the problem as (48/2) * (9+3) = 288 . Brackets first and left to right

Windsor220 · 15-04-2011, 02:54 PM

BIMDAS people. BIMDAS!!

To me the answer is 2.

Falc'man · 15-04-2011, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 351@GT

48
--------------- = 2 as opposed to
2(9+3)

48
---------------- x (9+3) = 288
2

to me is reads as the first because the 2 is linked to the brackets as one unit. ( my 15yr old casio gets 2 also )

if it had a x between the 2 and the brackets then they are seperate and i would be 288, ie 48/2x(9+3) = 288

written as 48/2(9+3) then the brackets are linked to the 2 and therefore the answer is 2.

Exactly.

To elaborate further IF it was in the following format, 48 ÷ 2 x 1(9+3), then yes, the answer is 288.

jonesyedxr6 · 15-04-2011, 03:11 PM

288, no question.

Brackets, then left to right. Multiplication and division are over-ruled by left to right, addition and subtraction it doesn't matter..

metallurg · 15-04-2011, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJL351

Never heard of this BODMAS...???

I was taught BIMDAS - Brackets, Indices, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction
(I'm 34)

Was thinking the same thing. What the hell is BOMDAS or BODMAS or whatever...it was BIMDAS when I went to school!

**Polyal** · 15-04-2011, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Exactly.

To elaborate further IF it was in the following format, 48 ÷ 2 x 1(9+3), then yes, the answer is 288.

+1

StealthAu · 15-04-2011, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

BUT, same calc but with the notation that I was taught:

48/(2(9+3)) = 2 - while the question didn't have the bracket infront of the 2 originally this is how I was taught to write it.

So you were taught to rewrite formulas in what ever way suits your answer?
48/2(9+3) and 48/(2(9+3)) are completely different questions, no one would of taught you to change questions just for the sake of getting the answer you want hey.

jonesyedxr6 · 15-04-2011, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 351@GT

48
--------------- = 2 as opposed to
2(9+3)

48
---------------- x (9+3) = 288
2

to me is reads as the first because the 2 is linked to the brackets as one unit. ( my 15yr old casio gets 2 also )

if it had a x between the 2 and the brackets then they are seperate and i would be 288, ie 48/2x(9+3) = 288

written as 48/2(9+3) then the brackets are linked to the 2 and therefore the answer is 2.

To look like what you've said above

48
-----
2(9+3)

the problem would have to have an extra set of brackets and look like

48 ÷ (2(9+3))

because once you do the (9+3) on the bottom half of the fraction, now the
2 * 12 is no longer the denominator, it would then just go back to being

48 ÷ 2 * 12, so then you continue going left to right.

Streets · 15-04-2011, 03:22 PM

This thread reminds me of the scene in 2001: A Space Odyssey when the ape-men discover the monolith

Geez Louise · 15-04-2011, 03:26 PM

Maybe we should send this into SBS - Letters and numbers show... and get Lily to solve it!

and by the way...if you pop it into Excel as =sum(48/2(9+3) you get....288.

**Burnout** · 15-04-2011, 03:28 PM

What's a BODMAS ????

Is that a Potato Farmers Christmas???

Falc'man · 15-04-2011, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonesyedxr6

To look like what you've said above

48
-----
2(9+3)

the problem would have to have an extra set of brackets and look like

48 ÷ (2(9+3))

because once you do the (9+3) on the bottom half of the fraction, now the
2 * 12 is no longer the denominator, it would then just go back to being

48 ÷ 2 * 12, so then you continue going left to right.

Actually it doesn't need brackets; having no sign between the 2 and the bracket is sufficient indication you multiply the 2 with the 12 before you divide.

auxr · 15-04-2011, 03:31 PM

Bomdas,Bodmas, Bomborra,Cowbombie etc - that gentlemen is the mind
f%#k for this Friday afternoon.

I for one, come from the rote generation- do it over and over in your head or on paper- get it wrong, either a duster or a piece of chalk slightly tapped on the back of your skull.

Answer IMO is 288.

StealthAu · 15-04-2011, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Actually it doesn't need brackets; having no sign between the 2 and the bracket is sufficient indication you multiply the 2 with the 12 before you divide.

Bollocks.

jonesyedxr6 · 15-04-2011, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Actually it doesn't need brackets; having no sign between the 2 and the bracket is sufficient indication you multiply the 2 with the 12 before you divide.

..you would, if the 48 wasn't left of it.

Rodp · 15-04-2011, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonesyedxr6

To look like what you've said above

48
-----
2(9+3)

the problem would have to have an extra set of brackets and look like

48 ÷ (2(9+3))

because once you do the (9+3) on the bottom half of the fraction, now the
2 * 12 is no longer the denominator, it would then just go back to being

48 ÷ 2 * 12, so then you continue going left to right.

Not necessarily.

Written as 2(9+3) to me denotes a single function. If it was 2 x (9+3) then I would have answered 288. You can imply 2 x (9+3) just as you can imply (2(9+3))

Windsor220 · 15-04-2011, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

Maybe we should send this into SBS - Letters and numbers show... and get Lily to solve it!

Do it! This is one of those things that is going to annoy me. I want to know what the experts say.

shedcoupe · 15-04-2011, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by auxr

Cop this then - E=Mc2

actually the equation is E = mc²

Now I think the answer is either 3 or 287.

jonesyedxr6 · 15-04-2011, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

Not necessarily.

Written as 2(9+3) to me denotes a single function. If it was 2 x (9+3) then I would have answered 288. You can imply 2 x (9+3) just as you can imply (2(9+3))

Ah but the '2' in is no more attached to the '(9+3)' than the '48' is attached to the '2', i see what you mean though but 2(9+3) is still exactly the same as 2 x (9+3)

TadKa · 15-04-2011, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave93761

Should have had a poll in this thread...

I did mean to but cocked it up

351@GT · 15-04-2011, 03:53 PM

if it was 2x(9+3) then its 288, without the x the 2(9+3) is one entity by itself.

go back and think of some more equations that are similar, if there is no symbol between the numbers and the brackets, the number belongs to the brackets and is worked our prior to using the symbols before it.

the 2 sections are 48 & 2(9+3), its NOT 3 sections as 48 & 2 & (9+3)