- 11,513
- 51
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2007
By the way,
48
--------- =/= 48÷2(9+3) They're two completely different equations.
2(9+3)
48
--------- =/= 48÷2(9+3) They're two completely different equations.
2(9+3)
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
Wow.Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Do you really lack that much comprehension i am talking about separation the numerator and denominator. According to you the division symbols adds parenthesis around the 2 parts of the equation . One set to the left of the division symbol another set to the right of the symbol. If that is the case why cant you show an example from someone NOT YOU that proves this indication and turns a problem the the division symbol into a fraction.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Division is now separation?Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
If this is true then why is there no evidence online supporting this claim that the division symbol separates an entire equation into 2 terms?
You telling me that my note is false.
Wow.Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Do you really lack that much comprehension i am talking about separation the numerator and denominator. According to you the division symbols adds parenthesis around the 2 parts of the equation . One set to the left of the division symbol another set to the right of the symbol. If that is the case why cant you show an example from someone NOT YOU that proves this indication and turns a problem the the division symbol into a fraction.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Division is now separation?Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
If this is true then why is there no evidence online supporting this claim that the division symbol separates an entire equation into 2 terms?
You telling me that my note is false.
Originally I thought it could be solved two ways, but if you strictly follow left --> right procedure then 288 is what should be the answer.Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG
There is nothing ambiguous about the equation.
÷ means division. + means addition. Juxtaposition means multiplication. If that's so hard, put a damn x in between the 2 and the () and you'll still get the exact same equation.
Order of operations states parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right)
There's no ambiguity in this equation. The people who think there is are overanalyzing the equation and making it more difficult than it's supposed to be.
Originally I thought it could be solved two ways, but if you strictly follow left --> right procedure then 288 is what should be the answer.Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG
There is nothing ambiguous about the equation.
÷ means division. + means addition. Juxtaposition means multiplication. If that's so hard, put a damn x in between the 2 and the () and you'll still get the exact same equation.
Order of operations states parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right)
There's no ambiguity in this equation. The people who think there is are overanalyzing the equation and making it more difficult than it's supposed to be.
Are you saying my examples were mathematically incorrect? (2+3) is incorrect notation?... I know I don't need parentheses, but I can put however many parentheses I want, breh.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
They don't prove your point. You just want it to seem that way to favor your WRONG interpretation. At least provide a REAL example like (2+3) - (6+1) =Originally Posted by il prescelto
Because they prove my point. Are you saying (2+3) and (6) are mathematically incorrect expressions? Get a life dude.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Why would you even use 2+3 and 6 as examples when there's no need to put them in ( )?
Come up with a real problem showing ( ) used for something else other than multiplication then we'll talk
Your math skills =*(+)
And you still haven't told me where the multiplication lies in (6).
Since you insist, though, here: (2+3)/5. The parentheses are needed, since (2+3)/5 simplifies to 1, whereas 2+3/5 simplifies to 13/5.
You really thought the sole purpose of parentheses was to indicate multiplication?... Who let you graduate from college? lol
No multiplication needed, right? WRONG. You multiply 2 and 3 with positive 1, multiply 6 and 1 with negative 1 before proceeding.
You don't need ( ) when the problem is clearly written as 2+3 , 2 + 3 or 2 + 3 because again, there is no need for them, just like your previous examples.
5 5 5
You have yet to prove me wrong. Where your sources at b?Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wow.Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Do you really lack that much comprehension i am talking about separation the numerator and denominator. According to you the division symbols adds parenthesis around the 2 parts of the equation . One set to the left of the division symbol another set to the right of the symbol. If that is the case why cant you show an example from someone NOT YOU that proves this indication and turns a problem the the division symbol into a fraction.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Division is now separation?
You telling me that my note is false.This is the same as your post earlier.
http://niketalk.yuku.com/sreply/10757645/48-2-9-3-
It never ends!
You have yet to prove me wrong. Where your sources at b?Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wow.Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Do you really lack that much comprehension i am talking about separation the numerator and denominator. According to you the division symbols adds parenthesis around the 2 parts of the equation . One set to the left of the division symbol another set to the right of the symbol. If that is the case why cant you show an example from someone NOT YOU that proves this indication and turns a problem the the division symbol into a fraction.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Division is now separation?
You telling me that my note is false.This is the same as your post earlier.
http://niketalk.yuku.com/sreply/10757645/48-2-9-3-
It never ends!
Are you saying my examples were mathematically incorrect? (2+3) is incorrect notation?... I know I don't need parentheses, but I can put however many parentheses I want, breh.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
They don't prove your point. You just want it to seem that way to favor your WRONG interpretation. At least provide a REAL example like (2+3) - (6+1) =Originally Posted by il prescelto
Because they prove my point. Are you saying (2+3) and (6) are mathematically incorrect expressions? Get a life dude.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Why would you even use 2+3 and 6 as examples when there's no need to put them in ( )?
Come up with a real problem showing ( ) used for something else other than multiplication then we'll talk
Your math skills =*(+)
And you still haven't told me where the multiplication lies in (6).
Since you insist, though, here: (2+3)/5. The parentheses are needed, since (2+3)/5 simplifies to 1, whereas 2+3/5 simplifies to 13/5.
You really thought the sole purpose of parentheses was to indicate multiplication?... Who let you graduate from college? lol
No multiplication needed, right? WRONG. You multiply 2 and 3 with positive 1, multiply 6 and 1 with negative 1 before proceeding.
You don't need ( ) when the problem is clearly written as 2+3 , 2 + 3 or 2 + 3 because again, there is no need for them, just like your previous examples.
5 5 5
You got the easy part right, now the hard part is proving this to KingCrux aka IWriteMyOwnMathLawsOriginally Posted by ElCatfisho
Originally I thought it could be solved two ways, but if you strictly follow left --> right procedure then 288 is what should be the answer.Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG
There is nothing ambiguous about the equation.
÷ means division. + means addition. Juxtaposition means multiplication. If that's so hard, put a damn x in between the 2 and the () and you'll still get the exact same equation.
Order of operations states parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right)
There's no ambiguity in this equation. The people who think there is are overanalyzing the equation and making it more difficult than it's supposed to be.
I am not sure why people are putting this equation into fractions and simplifying it from there.
Agreeing on that; there should be no need to complicate or rearrange the equation as it should be left as is to solve.
You got the easy part right, now the hard part is proving this to KingCrux aka IWriteMyOwnMathLawsOriginally Posted by ElCatfisho
Originally I thought it could be solved two ways, but if you strictly follow left --> right procedure then 288 is what should be the answer.Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG
There is nothing ambiguous about the equation.
÷ means division. + means addition. Juxtaposition means multiplication. If that's so hard, put a damn x in between the 2 and the () and you'll still get the exact same equation.
Order of operations states parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right)
There's no ambiguity in this equation. The people who think there is are overanalyzing the equation and making it more difficult than it's supposed to be.
I am not sure why people are putting this equation into fractions and simplifying it from there.
Agreeing on that; there should be no need to complicate or rearrange the equation as it should be left as is to solve.
Originally Posted by Ducky Quack
Hmm.. '÷' could be interpreted as fraction, but if we go back to basic math, it is basically just this symbol: â
Originally Posted by Ducky Quack
Hmm.. '÷' could be interpreted as fraction, but if we go back to basic math, it is basically just this symbol: â
Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Originally Posted by Ducky Quack
Hmm.. '÷' could be interpreted as fraction, but if we go back to basic math, it is basically just this symbol: â
The thing is where does it say that ÷ indicates a fraction combining all the terms and separating numerator and denominator with the division symbol.I have searched everywhere and have yet to find a source to agree with that statement.
Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Originally Posted by Ducky Quack
Hmm.. '÷' could be interpreted as fraction, but if we go back to basic math, it is basically just this symbol: â
The thing is where does it say that ÷ indicates a fraction combining all the terms and separating numerator and denominator with the division symbol.I have searched everywhere and have yet to find a source to agree with that statement.
You need a source to tell you how fractions are related to division and vice-versa?Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
You have yet to prove me wrong. Where your sources at b?Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wow.Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Do you really lack that much comprehension i am talking about separation the numerator and denominator. According to you the division symbols adds parenthesis around the 2 parts of the equation . One set to the left of the division symbol another set to the right of the symbol. If that is the case why cant you show an example from someone NOT YOU that proves this indication and turns a problem the the division symbol into a fraction.This is the same as your post earlier.
http://niketalk.yuku.com/sreply/10757645/48-2-9-3-
It never ends!
You need a source to tell you how fractions are related to division and vice-versa?Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
You have yet to prove me wrong. Where your sources at b?Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wow.Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Do you really lack that much comprehension i am talking about separation the numerator and denominator. According to you the division symbols adds parenthesis around the 2 parts of the equation . One set to the left of the division symbol another set to the right of the symbol. If that is the case why cant you show an example from someone NOT YOU that proves this indication and turns a problem the the division symbol into a fraction.This is the same as your post earlier.
http://niketalk.yuku.com/sreply/10757645/48-2-9-3-
It never ends!
* DEAD *Originally Posted by seasoned vet
Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Originally Posted by Ducky Quack
Hmm.. '÷' could be interpreted as fraction, but if we go back to basic math, it is basically just this symbol: â
The thing is where does it say that ÷ indicates a fraction combining all the terms and separating numerator and denominator with the division symbol.I have searched everywhere and have yet to find a source to agree with that statement.
- i feel sorry for your HS math teacher.
* DEAD *Originally Posted by seasoned vet
Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
Originally Posted by Ducky Quack
Hmm.. '÷' could be interpreted as fraction, but if we go back to basic math, it is basically just this symbol: â
The thing is where does it say that ÷ indicates a fraction combining all the terms and separating numerator and denominator with the division symbol.I have searched everywhere and have yet to find a source to agree with that statement.
- i feel sorry for your HS math teacher.
Rather start my calculus homework....Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
You got the easy part right, now the hard part is proving this to KingCrux aka IWriteMyOwnMathLawsOriginally Posted by ElCatfisho
Originally I thought it could be solved two ways, but if you strictly follow left --> right procedure then 288 is what should be the answer.Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG
There is nothing ambiguous about the equation.
÷ means division. + means addition. Juxtaposition means multiplication. If that's so hard, put a damn x in between the 2 and the () and you'll still get the exact same equation.
Order of operations states parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right)
There's no ambiguity in this equation. The people who think there is are overanalyzing the equation and making it more difficult than it's supposed to be.
I am not sure why people are putting this equation into fractions and simplifying it from there.
Agreeing on that; there should be no need to complicate or rearrange the equation as it should be left as is to solve.
Rather start my calculus homework....Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
You got the easy part right, now the hard part is proving this to KingCrux aka IWriteMyOwnMathLawsOriginally Posted by ElCatfisho
Originally I thought it could be solved two ways, but if you strictly follow left --> right procedure then 288 is what should be the answer.Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG
There is nothing ambiguous about the equation.
÷ means division. + means addition. Juxtaposition means multiplication. If that's so hard, put a damn x in between the 2 and the () and you'll still get the exact same equation.
Order of operations states parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division (whichever comes first from left to right), addition/subtraction (whichever comes first from left to right)
There's no ambiguity in this equation. The people who think there is are overanalyzing the equation and making it more difficult than it's supposed to be.
I am not sure why people are putting this equation into fractions and simplifying it from there.
Agreeing on that; there should be no need to complicate or rearrange the equation as it should be left as is to solve.
You cant read. You guys are adding parenthesis to this problem to create a fraction for the overall problem. According to you the division symbol takes the 48 and makes it the numeraotr and takes 2(9+3) as the denominator. You still think that 2(9+3) is one term. The division symbol doesn't turn that into one term like you think. It only tells you to divide to the next term. 2 and (9+3) are sepearte terms. If they were one term it would be indicated by another set of parenthesis.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
You need a source to tell you how fractions are related to division and vice-versa?Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
You have yet to prove me wrong. Where your sources at b?Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wow.This is the same as your post earlier.
http://niketalk.yuku.com/sreply/10757645/48-2-9-3-
It never ends!
I know I'm not the only one seeing this.
Stop the ignorance because I wasn't the only one who called you out on this.
You cant read. You guys are adding parenthesis to this problem to create a fraction for the overall problem. According to you the division symbol takes the 48 and makes it the numeraotr and takes 2(9+3) as the denominator. You still think that 2(9+3) is one term. The division symbol doesn't turn that into one term like you think. It only tells you to divide to the next term. 2 and (9+3) are sepearte terms. If they were one term it would be indicated by another set of parenthesis.Originally Posted by kingcrux31
You need a source to tell you how fractions are related to division and vice-versa?Originally Posted by usainboltisfast
You have yet to prove me wrong. Where your sources at b?Originally Posted by kingcrux31
Wow.This is the same as your post earlier.
http://niketalk.yuku.com/sreply/10757645/48-2-9-3-
It never ends!
I know I'm not the only one seeing this.
Stop the ignorance because I wasn't the only one who called you out on this.