- 29,035
- 64,022
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2001
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
O'RLY?Originally Posted by inspectah derek
I'm not debating against other 2'ers because most of their methods are understandable. You on the other hand, your claims are just wild. If this is still on the front page tomorrow, I'll see you later.
O'RLY?Originally Posted by inspectah derek
I'm not debating against other 2'ers because most of their methods are understandable. You on the other hand, your claims are just wild. If this is still on the front page tomorrow, I'll see you later.
You obviously missed the point she made that such a problem is rare and sure to incite arguments.Originally Posted by JChambers
Originally Posted by balloonoboy
I just posted a valid source on the last page. I even posted her resume. She knows her stuff.
One woman's statement on a website? Sorry, that's not going to override a solid convention that has been universally agreed upon as the rule to solve math equations. I can find ten thousand websites from solid sources that explain the order of operations, purplemath.com is not going to stand up against that.
You obviously missed the point she made that such a problem is rare and sure to incite arguments.Originally Posted by JChambers
Originally Posted by balloonoboy
I just posted a valid source on the last page. I even posted her resume. She knows her stuff.
One woman's statement on a website? Sorry, that's not going to override a solid convention that has been universally agreed upon as the rule to solve math equations. I can find ten thousand websites from solid sources that explain the order of operations, purplemath.com is not going to stand up against that.
Originally Posted by WallyHopp
Please
Excuse
My
Dear
Aunt
Sally
Thats all you need to remember in life
Originally Posted by WallyHopp
Please
Excuse
My
Dear
Aunt
Sally
Thats all you need to remember in life
Originally Posted by do work son
i had the same dream
asked my math teacher, then saw the science teacher that hated me. felt like i was back in middle school again, until i woke up for my 8 AM
Originally Posted by do work son
i had the same dream
asked my math teacher, then saw the science teacher that hated me. felt like i was back in middle school again, until i woke up for my 8 AM
Originally Posted by snakeyes17
I had a dream about this last night..WHAT IN THE WORLD ?!
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
Originally Posted by snakeyes17
I had a dream about this last night..WHAT IN THE WORLD ?!
I remember it clear as day. I went back to my middle school and asked a random teacher, and showed him what I was talking about. I don't even remember what the teacher said. Then I started seeing old teachers I knew and forgot about the problem,
Technically it does. You can say that 1 is being multiplied by what is in the parenthesis. But this is getting out of hand y'all are still debating over this. This problem is too ambiguous.Originally Posted by inspectah derek
Division sure is the inverse of multiplication. But parentheses don't necessarily mean multiplication.
http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa040502a.htm
Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wrong.
Technically it does. You can say that 1 is being multiplied by what is in the parenthesis. But this is getting out of hand y'all are still debating over this. This problem is too ambiguous.Originally Posted by inspectah derek
Division sure is the inverse of multiplication. But parentheses don't necessarily mean multiplication.
http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa040502a.htm
Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wrong.
Oh I'm sorry let's disregard the greatest computer innovation of 2009 according to Popular Science.Originally Posted by BC2310
I do not trust the german site and it's feasible that any math software would use both signs interchangeably which is incorrect.Originally Posted by NikeVandal
Originally Posted by BC2310
NO ONE CAN DEFEND MYALGEBRA.COM
ANYONE GETTING HEATED OVER THIS IS LOSING AT LIFE
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY I'M TYPING IN CAPS
Team2 btw
COMPUTATIONAL KNOWLEDGE ENGINE > My ALGEBRA
youre trying to tell me your toyota corolla is better than my ferrari
Unfortunately the og division symbol is so old and played out it has little relevance today, until some trolling genius came up with this poorly written 'simple' equation.
Why do you think it's written that way everywhere? and not with / ? with / it's 288 with the og division symbol it's 2.
let's be real U Mad b/c I made fun of your all cap know it all message board style
Thank you MathGodOriginally Posted by ThunderChunk69
TEAM288 REPRESENT.Originally Posted by Klipschorn
[48÷2(9)]+[48÷2(3)]
That is how you distribute. You follow order of operations, division and then multiplication within each bracket.
[24(9)]+[24(3)]
216+72 = 288
Actually, you're wrong.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Distributing a number NOT DIRECTLY ATTACHED to ( ) is WRONG.Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69
Thank you MathGodOriginally Posted by Klipschorn
TEAM288 REPRESENT.
hope this lulls Crux to sleep
also, smh at not knowing the other night, was sleepy
It's becoming more and more evident how many of you don't know what you're talking about.
Oh I'm sorry let's disregard the greatest computer innovation of 2009 according to Popular Science.Originally Posted by BC2310
I do not trust the german site and it's feasible that any math software would use both signs interchangeably which is incorrect.Originally Posted by NikeVandal
Originally Posted by BC2310
NO ONE CAN DEFEND MYALGEBRA.COM
ANYONE GETTING HEATED OVER THIS IS LOSING AT LIFE
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY I'M TYPING IN CAPS
Team2 btw
COMPUTATIONAL KNOWLEDGE ENGINE > My ALGEBRA
youre trying to tell me your toyota corolla is better than my ferrari
Unfortunately the og division symbol is so old and played out it has little relevance today, until some trolling genius came up with this poorly written 'simple' equation.
Why do you think it's written that way everywhere? and not with / ? with / it's 288 with the og division symbol it's 2.
let's be real U Mad b/c I made fun of your all cap know it all message board style
Thank you MathGodOriginally Posted by ThunderChunk69
TEAM288 REPRESENT.Originally Posted by Klipschorn
[48÷2(9)]+[48÷2(3)]
That is how you distribute. You follow order of operations, division and then multiplication within each bracket.
[24(9)]+[24(3)]
216+72 = 288
Actually, you're wrong.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Distributing a number NOT DIRECTLY ATTACHED to ( ) is WRONG.Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69
Thank you MathGodOriginally Posted by Klipschorn
TEAM288 REPRESENT.
hope this lulls Crux to sleep
also, smh at not knowing the other night, was sleepy
It's becoming more and more evident how many of you don't know what you're talking about.
Originally Posted by Storm2006
how did this thread get to 127 pages so quickly?
Originally Posted by Storm2006
how did this thread get to 127 pages so quickly?