48÷2(9+3) = ???

[unkletomcruze]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

And UncleTomCruze, you've said multiple times in the thread the answer can be 2, 8.6(repeating), or 288.

Your argument for choosing 288 over the other two is because you said using distribution yields two possible answers, whereas sttict PEMDAS yields only 288.

But you do agree that there are a possibility of three answers, but you still champion 288. That's a $$%!% move. Stand by your word and say that the answer is undefinable.

I don't know why no one called your !%! out on that earlier. Pitiful.

Yes, there is a possibility of three answers...ESPECIALLY AFTER YOU RESORT TO MATHEMATICAL PROPERTIES THAT SHOULDN'T EVEN BE APPLIED, WORD TO THE DISTRIBUTIVE PROPERTY...

If you tackle the math the way it's supposed to be done, there is only one answer = 288.


...

 

[servechilled81]

288 Brick Squad

 

[servechilled81]

288 Brick Squad

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by ServeChilled81

288 Brick Squad

This is just too much.
Thread is full of

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by ServeChilled81

288 Brick Squad

This is just too much.
Thread is full of

 

[mecks]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by cesarhpr1986

Originally Posted by MECKS


true or false
a(b+c) can be written as (ab+bc) ?

following this logic. you have to do the a(b+c) first, because its a division symbol. not / which would have made it 48/2 or 24/1 (a fraction)

FALSE
a(b+c) can be written as ab+ac

    

Already schooled him on it but you are either the first or 2nd person outside of me that understands distribution. So for that I give you props.

solve 15+3(2x1)

like i said a(b+c0 DOES = ab+ac but in an equation such as above you have to consider it as (ab+ac)
(my bad with the typo above i just realized i put " b " where the a should be )

 

[mecks]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by cesarhpr1986

Originally Posted by MECKS


true or false
a(b+c) can be written as (ab+bc) ?

following this logic. you have to do the a(b+c) first, because its a division symbol. not / which would have made it 48/2 or 24/1 (a fraction)

FALSE
a(b+c) can be written as ab+ac

    

Already schooled him on it but you are either the first or 2nd person outside of me that understands distribution. So for that I give you props.

solve 15+3(2x1)

like i said a(b+c0 DOES = ab+ac but in an equation such as above you have to consider it as (ab+ac)
(my bad with the typo above i just realized i put " b " where the a should be )

 

[mo greene]

Originally Posted by MECKS

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by cesarhpr1986

FALSE
a(b+c) can be written as ab+ac

    

Already schooled him on it but you are either the first or 2nd person outside of me that understands distribution. So for that I give you props.

solve 15+3(2x1)

like i said a(b+c0 DOES = ab+ac but in an equation such as above you have to consider it as (ab+ac)
(my bad with the typo above i just realized i put " b " where the a should be )

The distributive property is handy to help you get rid of parentheses

a(b + c) = ab + ac

http://math.about.com/od/algebra/a/distributive.htm

 

[mo greene]

Originally Posted by MECKS

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

Originally Posted by cesarhpr1986

FALSE
a(b+c) can be written as ab+ac

    

Already schooled him on it but you are either the first or 2nd person outside of me that understands distribution. So for that I give you props.

solve 15+3(2x1)

like i said a(b+c0 DOES = ab+ac but in an equation such as above you have to consider it as (ab+ac)
(my bad with the typo above i just realized i put " b " where the a should be )

The distributive property is handy to help you get rid of parentheses

a(b + c) = ab + ac

http://math.about.com/od/algebra/a/distributive.htm

 

[do work son]

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

 

[do work son]

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

 

[certifiedsw]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by K2theAblaM

Originally Posted by MECKS

Originally Posted by i just got lucky

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

 

[certifiedsw]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by K2theAblaM

Originally Posted by MECKS

Originally Posted by i just got lucky

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

 

[certifiedsw]

Originally Posted by do work son

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

 

[certifiedsw]

Originally Posted by do work son

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

 

[franchise3]

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by K2theAblaM

Originally Posted by MECKS

Originally Posted by i just got lucky

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

 

[franchise3]

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by K2theAblaM

Originally Posted by MECKS

Originally Posted by i just got lucky

Originally Posted by kingcrux31

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by do work son

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

you're arguing an implied parenthesis like so -(11)^2 but when i say there is an implied parenthesis around 2(9+3), im wrong? oh ok.

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by do work son

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

you're arguing an implied parenthesis like so -(11)^2 but when i say there is an implied parenthesis around 2(9+3), im wrong? oh ok.

 

[balloonoboy]

This is where the problem originated.http://www.hotpursuit.cc/...math-problem-t31205.htmlAs the thread states multiple times, the answer varies.

 

[balloonoboy]

This is where the problem originated.http://www.hotpursuit.cc/...math-problem-t31205.htmlAs the thread states multiple times, the answer varies.

 

[certifiedsw]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by do work son

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

so now you argue an implied parenthesis, but when i say there is an implied parenthesis around 2(9+3), im wrong? oh ok.

WHERE DID I IMPLY THAT THERE WAS A PARENTHESES ANYWHERE??? I SAID, OF COURSE IT'S GOING TO BE NEGATIVE IF YOU DO NOT PUT PARENTHESES AROUND THE -11 TRYING TO PROVE MY POINT THAT WOLFRAM ALPHA WORKS CORRECTLY YOU LAME. 
Some of you are so stubborn that you make stupid !@# comments. Did I just not prove your stupid !@# theory wrong as well? CAN YOU ADMIT THAT?

YOU DO NOT KNOW MATH. IT IS EVIDENT FROM YOUR POSTS THAT YOU ARE CLEARLY CONFUSED.

 

[certifiedsw]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by do work son

for everyone championing wolfram alpha and TI calculators. input -11^2 and what do you get? if you square a negative, you always get a positive number right?

according to wolfram alpha, that would be wrong.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

so now you argue an implied parenthesis, but when i say there is an implied parenthesis around 2(9+3), im wrong? oh ok.

WHERE DID I IMPLY THAT THERE WAS A PARENTHESES ANYWHERE??? I SAID, OF COURSE IT'S GOING TO BE NEGATIVE IF YOU DO NOT PUT PARENTHESES AROUND THE -11 TRYING TO PROVE MY POINT THAT WOLFRAM ALPHA WORKS CORRECTLY YOU LAME. 
Some of you are so stubborn that you make stupid !@# comments. Did I just not prove your stupid !@# theory wrong as well? CAN YOU ADMIT THAT?

YOU DO NOT KNOW MATH. IT IS EVIDENT FROM YOUR POSTS THAT YOU ARE CLEARLY CONFUSED.

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW


Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

so now you argue an implied parenthesis, but when i say there is an implied parenthesis around 2(9+3), im wrong? oh ok.

WHERE DID I IMPLY THAT THERE WAS A PARENTHESES ANYWHERE??? I SAID, OF COURSE IT'S GOING TO BE NEGATIVE IF YOU DO NOT PUT PARENTHESES AROUND THE -11 TRYING TO PROVE MY POINT THAT WOLFRAM ALPHA WORKS CORRECTLY YOU LAME. 
Some of you are so stubborn that you make stupid !@# comments. Did I just not prove your stupid !@# theory wrong as well? CAN YOU ADMIT THAT?

YOU DO NOT KNOW MATH. IT IS EVIDENT FROM YOUR POSTS THAT YOU ARE CLEARLY CONFUSED.

if you square -11, you don't get a negative number

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by CertifiedSW


Of course it's going to be negative if you don't put the parentheses around 

When you write it as -11^2

It is saying -1 x 11^2

Therefore, you square the 11 first (PEMDAS)

Then multiply by -1, hence -121. 

Why do you guys INSIST on saying Wolfram Alpha and calculators don't work? Ya'll are some clowns for real.

Stop posting, you are bringing up horrible points. 

so now you argue an implied parenthesis, but when i say there is an implied parenthesis around 2(9+3), im wrong? oh ok.

WHERE DID I IMPLY THAT THERE WAS A PARENTHESES ANYWHERE??? I SAID, OF COURSE IT'S GOING TO BE NEGATIVE IF YOU DO NOT PUT PARENTHESES AROUND THE -11 TRYING TO PROVE MY POINT THAT WOLFRAM ALPHA WORKS CORRECTLY YOU LAME. 
Some of you are so stubborn that you make stupid !@# comments. Did I just not prove your stupid !@# theory wrong as well? CAN YOU ADMIT THAT?

YOU DO NOT KNOW MATH. IT IS EVIDENT FROM YOUR POSTS THAT YOU ARE CLEARLY CONFUSED.

if you square -11, you don't get a negative number