48÷2(9+3) = ???

[frostythepoptart]

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

 

[frostythepoptart]

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

 

[apocalypz]

 @ this reaching 18 pages. God damn.

And with the way that the question is written, that answer is 2. It could be 288 only if the (9 + 3) was separated from the divisor.

 

[usainboltisfast]

The ONLY way it is 2 is if you believe in multiplication by juxtaposition as a valid part of order of operation. THAT IS THE ONLY way it is 2.

 

[fenixconnexion.]

man i'm tempted to bring this to my calc prof... 18 pages

 

[apocalypz]

 @ this reaching 18 pages. God damn.

And with the way that the question is written, that answer is 2. It could be 288 only if the (9 + 3) was separated from the divisor.

 

[usainboltisfast]

The ONLY way it is 2 is if you believe in multiplication by juxtaposition as a valid part of order of operation. THAT IS THE ONLY way it is 2.

 

[fenixconnexion.]

man i'm tempted to bring this to my calc prof... 18 pages

 

[pusha c]

its funny how on the first page bammas were asking how did this thread get to x pages on other forums

idiots

 

[fullmetal]

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

Yeah okay but in 48/2(12) division comes before multiplication. 

 

[pusha c]

its funny how on the first page bammas were asking how did this thread get to x pages on other forums

idiots

 

[optimusadl]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

There is no assumption. That is just how you solve the problem if you follow the distributive property. If you ignore the distributive property, you can get 288.

So you saying you cant distribute a fraction? Without parentheses you cant assume just 2 is the distribution. If you distribute 48/2 you get 288.

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

You are solving the equation 48/(2(9+3)) in the original.
If we solve your way we dont get the answer 2 or 288.

48 / 18 + 6[h3]÷[/h3]

 

[optimusadl]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

There is no assumption. That is just how you solve the problem if you follow the distributive property. If you ignore the distributive property, you can get 288.

So you saying you cant distribute a fraction? Without parentheses you cant assume just 2 is the distribution. If you distribute 48/2 you get 288.

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

You are solving the equation 48/(2(9+3)) in the original.
If we solve your way we dont get the answer 2 or 288.

48 / 18 + 6[h3]÷[/h3]

 

[fullmetal]

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

Yeah okay but in 48/2(12) division comes before multiplication. 

 

[waystinthyme]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

48 / 2(9 + 3) IS NOT the original equation...

48÷2(9+3) IS the original equation.

-waystinthyme

  

/ and Ã· are the same thing.

you're right...

but 48/2(9+3) can be misinterpreted when written in a horizontal line...while 48÷2(9+3), can not...

which is my point. if you look at the ORIGINAL equation, the answer should be obvious. please see my other post. if the 2 crowd wants to add parentheses, then with the ORIGINAL equation, you could rewrite it as (48÷2)(9+3), but it is fine as originally written.

-waystinthyme

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Word?

Taken from Wikipedia:


Given a set S and two binary operations · and + on S, we say that the operation ·

is left-distributive over + if, given any elements x, y, and z of S,

x · (y + z) = (x · y) + (x · z);



is right-distributive over + if, given any elements x, y, and z of S:

(y + z) · x = (y · x) + (z · x);



is distributive over + if it is both left- and right-distributive.

Notice that when · is commutative, then the three above conditions are logically equivalent.

They didn't combine anything or leave them in parenthesis.

wait wait wait, you didn't just quote wikipedia did you?

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Yea but it agrees with the chart I posted and other distributive property rules. Take that %+%@ somewhere else. No where does it state you HAVE to resolve what's in the parenthesis. Only that you have to distribute.

You are wrong ballonboy. The example you gave was using variables not real numbers. In a situation with numbers you must SIMPLIFY before you move on. The reason your example didnt simplify is because you cant simplify passed that for just variables.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by balloonoboy

Word?

Taken from Wikipedia:


Given a set S and two binary operations · and + on S, we say that the operation ·

is left-distributive over + if, given any elements x, y, and z of S,

x · (y + z) = (x · y) + (x · z);



is right-distributive over + if, given any elements x, y, and z of S:

(y + z) · x = (y · x) + (z · x);



is distributive over + if it is both left- and right-distributive.

Notice that when · is commutative, then the three above conditions are logically equivalent.

They didn't combine anything or leave them in parenthesis.

wait wait wait, you didn't just quote wikipedia did you?

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Yea but it agrees with the chart I posted and other distributive property rules. Take that %+%@ somewhere else. No where does it state you HAVE to resolve what's in the parenthesis. Only that you have to distribute.

You are wrong ballonboy. The example you gave was using variables not real numbers. In a situation with numbers you must SIMPLIFY before you move on. The reason your example didnt simplify is because you cant simplify passed that for just variables.

 

[waystinthyme]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

48 / 2(9 + 3) IS NOT the original equation...

48÷2(9+3) IS the original equation.

-waystinthyme

  

/ and Ã· are the same thing.

you're right...

but 48/2(9+3) can be misinterpreted when written in a horizontal line...while 48÷2(9+3), can not...

which is my point. if you look at the ORIGINAL equation, the answer should be obvious. please see my other post. if the 2 crowd wants to add parentheses, then with the ORIGINAL equation, you could rewrite it as (48÷2)(9+3), but it is fine as originally written.

-waystinthyme

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by FullMetal

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

Yeah okay but in 48/2(12) division comes before multiplication. 

parenthesis comes before both division and multiplication.

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by FullMetal

Originally Posted by frostythepoptart

the parenthesis doesn't magically disappear after adding. (9+3) (7+2)
(12)(9)
Otherwise %!$ is left in the equation just a 12 and a 9 with no sign or anything to do with it?

48/2(9+3)

48/2(12)

Parenthesis is still there and will always be there until you take action to get rid of it by multiplying

48/24

2 jesus.

Yeah okay but in 48/2(12) division comes before multiplication. 

parenthesis comes before both division and multiplication.

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

So you saying you cant distribute a fraction? Without parentheses you cant assume just 2 is the distribution. If you distribute 48/2 you get 288.

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

You are solving the equation 48/(2(9+3)) in the original.
If we solve your way we dont get the answer 2 or 288.

48 / 18 + 6[h3]÷[/h3]

I've done the equation like five times in this thread and have shown work each time I've done it 

I'll do it again for you though.

48 / 2(9 +3) = 48 / (18 + 6)   < -- just because you distributed doesn't mean you're done with the parentheses)

                    = 48 / 24

                    = 2

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

So you saying you cant distribute a fraction? Without parentheses you cant assume just 2 is the distribution. If you distribute 48/2 you get 288.

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

You are solving the equation 48/(2(9+3)) in the original.
If we solve your way we dont get the answer 2 or 288.

48 / 18 + 6[h3]÷[/h3]

I've done the equation like five times in this thread and have shown work each time I've done it 

I'll do it again for you though.

48 / 2(9 +3) = 48 / (18 + 6)   < -- just because you distributed doesn't mean you're done with the parentheses)

                    = 48 / 24

                    = 2

 

[waystinthyme]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

You are solving the equation 48/(2(9+3)) in the original.
If we solve your way we dont get the answer 2 or 288.

48 / 18 + 6[h3]÷[/h3]

I've done the equation like five times in this thread and have shown work each time I've done it 

I'll do it again for you though.

48 / 2(9 +3) = 48 / (18 + 6)   < -- just because you distributed doesn't mean you're done with the parentheses)

                    = 48 / 24

                    = 2

again, how can you assume that you're distributing the 2, and not the entire 48÷2?

see my other post. i assume you have no answer to this.

-waystinthyme
  

 

[2g00d4u]

Originally Posted by usainboltisfast

The ONLY way it is 2 is if you believe in multiplication by juxtaposition as a valid part of order of operation. THAT IS THE ONLY way it is 2.

This here. At first, I thought there could be only one right answer, but didnt know that you had to completely get rid of any parentheses.

I think someone already posted this link: http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops2.htm

I read through 2-3 different forums dealing with this problem and all of the answers were nearly split 50/50.

Basically, my head hurts now

Edit

something I still dont understand is distributing. it doesnt seem like it applies here.

 

[waystinthyme]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

You can. But as the question is written, you can't.
If it were written (48 / 2)(9 + 3) it would be 288. You can not make that assumption because it was not explicitly stated. 

as it stands, 48 / 2(9 + 3) MUST be solved by distributing the 2 amongst (9 + 3) first.

and again 2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3))

Hopefully that clears it up once and for all.

You are solving the equation 48/(2(9+3)) in the original.
If we solve your way we dont get the answer 2 or 288.

48 / 18 + 6[h3]÷[/h3]

I've done the equation like five times in this thread and have shown work each time I've done it 

I'll do it again for you though.

48 / 2(9 +3) = 48 / (18 + 6)   < -- just because you distributed doesn't mean you're done with the parentheses)

                    = 48 / 24

                    = 2

again, how can you assume that you're distributing the 2, and not the entire 48÷2?

see my other post. i assume you have no answer to this.

-waystinthyme