48÷2(9+3) = ???

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by KkennethJ

What I find most amazing is that people still don't know how to use PEMDAS. Arguing that you HAVE to multiple then divide. That argument is already proven irrelevant and put down MULTIPLE times. But hey look at the bright side you learned basic math in Niketalk.


The real argument here is what to do with 48/2(12)

You basically got it right. The only issue is that form my own short research multiplicaion by juxtaposition doesn't hold any true weight in order of operations. Feel free to correct me if im wrong but logically this idea makes no sense. Writing a number in parnethesis is the same ideology as writing the / instead of the actual division symbol. Normally we apply the idea of showing multiplication as the variables touching each other but the reason why we have to emphasize the PARENTHESIS in this situation is to show it is multiplication rather than having them touch and showing 212 it makes more logical sense to use 2(12). When someone writes 48/2 some people think it is showing a fraction which it looks to be doing but in reality it is a short hand way to show division. When you think of a fraction you think part of something when people right 48/2 its usually an equation and it implies that 48 is divided by 2. If it was implied as a fraction it would be saying there are 48 of 2 not 48 divided by two. It really boils down to definition of mathematical syntax.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by KkennethJ

What I find most amazing is that people still don't know how to use PEMDAS. Arguing that you HAVE to multiple then divide. That argument is already proven irrelevant and put down MULTIPLE times. But hey look at the bright side you learned basic math in Niketalk.


The real argument here is what to do with 48/2(12)

You basically got it right. The only issue is that form my own short research multiplicaion by juxtaposition doesn't hold any true weight in order of operations. Feel free to correct me if im wrong but logically this idea makes no sense. Writing a number in parnethesis is the same ideology as writing the / instead of the actual division symbol. Normally we apply the idea of showing multiplication as the variables touching each other but the reason why we have to emphasize the PARENTHESIS in this situation is to show it is multiplication rather than having them touch and showing 212 it makes more logical sense to use 2(12). When someone writes 48/2 some people think it is showing a fraction which it looks to be doing but in reality it is a short hand way to show division. When you think of a fraction you think part of something when people right 48/2 its usually an equation and it implies that 48 is divided by 2. If it was implied as a fraction it would be saying there are 48 of 2 not 48 divided by two. It really boils down to definition of mathematical syntax.

 

[optimusadl]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

I dont see the argument. You should get the same answer anyway you solve it as long as you follow the rules.

48/2(9+3)

Using Quotient rule and Distribution rule the problem can be re-written as

48*.5(9+3)

Which still gives you 288.

thank you.

for the parethenses purists...the 48/2 should be multiplied by the value in the parenthesis, not just the 2.

which gives you the correct answer, 288.

/thread.

-waystinthyme
  

Only true if 48 / 2 were (48 / 2).
Sorry bro.

Dude you dont even need distribution to solve the equation. As soon as you add (9+3) those parentheses go bye bye. You are latching onto distribution because that is the only way you can try to justify adding a second set of imagination parentheses around "2(12)".
48 / 2 * (9+3)

48 / 2 * 12

Convert is all to multiplication to avoid PEMDAS issues and get

48 * .5 * 12 = 288

 

[optimusadl]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

I dont see the argument. You should get the same answer anyway you solve it as long as you follow the rules.

48/2(9+3)

Using Quotient rule and Distribution rule the problem can be re-written as

48*.5(9+3)

Which still gives you 288.

thank you.

for the parethenses purists...the 48/2 should be multiplied by the value in the parenthesis, not just the 2.

which gives you the correct answer, 288.

/thread.

-waystinthyme
  

Only true if 48 / 2 were (48 / 2).
Sorry bro.

Dude you dont even need distribution to solve the equation. As soon as you add (9+3) those parentheses go bye bye. You are latching onto distribution because that is the only way you can try to justify adding a second set of imagination parentheses around "2(12)".
48 / 2 * (9+3)

48 / 2 * 12

Convert is all to multiplication to avoid PEMDAS issues and get

48 * .5 * 12 = 288

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by dumbout227

Originally Posted by KkennethJ

What I find most amazing is that people still don't know how to use PEMDAS. Arguing that you HAVE to multiple then divide. That argument is already proven irrelevant and put down MULTIPLE times. But hey look at the bright side you learned basic math in Niketalk.


The real argument here is what to do with 48/2(12)

Divide it first. Then multiple. I learned that if the equation is this short and only 2 basic operations are left in the problem ( Multiplication and Division) ( Addition or subtraction) at this point one just does basic math and PEMDAS becomes void. So in this case divide 48 by 2 and then multiply by 12. This only is used though if the problem has only addition and subtraction remaining or if the problem has multiplication and division remaining. Even though there is a parenthesis here it serves the same purpose as a multiplication sign. I've literally only seen this example in my lifetime of doing math once.

Parentheses are the same as multiplication signs but they are not equivalent in the order of operations.

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by 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.

LOL. The rule deals with what is inside the parentheses. 9+3. That is ALL that Parentheses means. It doesn't mean multiply that by 2 because it is in parentheses. It just simplifies it to the action of multiplication. 48/2(12) is NOT 48/(2(12)). That would mean to use Parentheses again. But it is just 48/2(12) which is the SAME thing as 48/2*12. In which, you only have division and multiplication, and have to do which comes first. 48/2=24 then 24*12=288.
I cannot believe this thread is still going

It is
288

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by 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.

LOL. The rule deals with what is inside the parentheses. 9+3. That is ALL that Parentheses means. It doesn't mean multiply that by 2 because it is in parentheses. It just simplifies it to the action of multiplication. 48/2(12) is NOT 48/(2(12)). That would mean to use Parentheses again. But it is just 48/2(12) which is the SAME thing as 48/2*12. In which, you only have division and multiplication, and have to do which comes first. 48/2=24 then 24*12=288.
I cannot believe this thread is still going

It is
288

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by dumbout227

Originally Posted by KkennethJ

What I find most amazing is that people still don't know how to use PEMDAS. Arguing that you HAVE to multiple then divide. That argument is already proven irrelevant and put down MULTIPLE times. But hey look at the bright side you learned basic math in Niketalk.


The real argument here is what to do with 48/2(12)

Divide it first. Then multiple. I learned that if the equation is this short and only 2 basic operations are left in the problem ( Multiplication and Division) ( Addition or subtraction) at this point one just does basic math and PEMDAS becomes void. So in this case divide 48 by 2 and then multiply by 12. This only is used though if the problem has only addition and subtraction remaining or if the problem has multiplication and division remaining. Even though there is a parenthesis here it serves the same purpose as a multiplication sign. I've literally only seen this example in my lifetime of doing math once.

Parentheses are the same as multiplication signs but they are not equivalent in the order of operations.

 

[nermindee]

the human race's future will depend on this... eerie

 

[nermindee]

the human race's future will depend on this... eerie

 

[DeadsetAce]

im going to down 4 or 5 beers and then re-visit this thread in a couple hours

 

[DeadsetAce]

im going to down 4 or 5 beers and then re-visit this thread in a couple hours

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by dumbout227

Originally Posted by KkennethJ

What I find most amazing is that people still don't know how to use PEMDAS. Arguing that you HAVE to multiple then divide. That argument is already proven irrelevant and put down MULTIPLE times. But hey look at the bright side you learned basic math in Niketalk.


The real argument here is what to do with 48/2(12)

Divide it first. Then multiple. I learned that if the equation is this short and only 2 basic operations are left in the problem ( Multiplication and Division) ( Addition or subtraction) at this point one just does basic math and PEMDAS becomes void. So in this case divide 48 by 2 and then multiply by 12. This only is used though if the problem has only addition and subtraction remaining or if the problem has multiplication and division remaining. Even though there is a parenthesis here it serves the same purpose as a multiplication sign. I've literally only seen this example in my lifetime of doing math once.

Parentheses are the same as multiplication signs but they are not equivalent in the order of operations.

YES THEY ARE.
Parentheses in the order of operations ONLY means what is inside the parentheses.
After that is done, it is the EXACT same as multiplication.
Lord, I don't know what is so hard to understand about that.

 

[snakeyes17]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by dumbout227

Originally Posted by KkennethJ

What I find most amazing is that people still don't know how to use PEMDAS. Arguing that you HAVE to multiple then divide. That argument is already proven irrelevant and put down MULTIPLE times. But hey look at the bright side you learned basic math in Niketalk.


The real argument here is what to do with 48/2(12)

Divide it first. Then multiple. I learned that if the equation is this short and only 2 basic operations are left in the problem ( Multiplication and Division) ( Addition or subtraction) at this point one just does basic math and PEMDAS becomes void. So in this case divide 48 by 2 and then multiply by 12. This only is used though if the problem has only addition and subtraction remaining or if the problem has multiplication and division remaining. Even though there is a parenthesis here it serves the same purpose as a multiplication sign. I've literally only seen this example in my lifetime of doing math once.

Parentheses are the same as multiplication signs but they are not equivalent in the order of operations.

YES THEY ARE.
Parentheses in the order of operations ONLY means what is inside the parentheses.
After that is done, it is the EXACT same as multiplication.
Lord, I don't know what is so hard to understand about that.

 

[just blazed]

Originally Posted by SoHi 23

How the hell is this 18 21 pages LMAOOOO x 1000 48÷2(9+3)

fixed

 

[just blazed]

Originally Posted by SoHi 23

How the hell is this 18 21 pages LMAOOOO x 1000 48÷2(9+3)

fixed

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme


thank you.

for the parethenses purists...the 48/2 should be multiplied by the value in the parenthesis, not just the 2.

which gives you the correct answer, 288.

/thread.

-waystinthyme
  

Only true if 48 / 2 were (48 / 2).
Sorry bro.

Dude you dont even need distribution to solve the equation. As soon as you add (9+3) those parentheses go bye bye. You are latching onto distribution because that is the only way you can try to justify adding a second set of imagination parentheses around "2(12)".
48 / 2 * (9+3)

48 / 2 * 12

Convert is all to multiplication to avoid PEMDAS issues and get

48 * .5 * 12 = 288

What are you talking about you don't need distribution?

 If we're looking at the same equation you definitely do need distribution. Before you even add 9 + 3 you have to multiply 2 to each integer. 2(9 + 3) comes first in the order of operations. solve that and then you divide it by 48.

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by OptimusADL

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme


thank you.

for the parethenses purists...the 48/2 should be multiplied by the value in the parenthesis, not just the 2.

which gives you the correct answer, 288.

/thread.

-waystinthyme
  

Only true if 48 / 2 were (48 / 2).
Sorry bro.

Dude you dont even need distribution to solve the equation. As soon as you add (9+3) those parentheses go bye bye. You are latching onto distribution because that is the only way you can try to justify adding a second set of imagination parentheses around "2(12)".
48 / 2 * (9+3)

48 / 2 * 12

Convert is all to multiplication to avoid PEMDAS issues and get

48 * .5 * 12 = 288

What are you talking about you don't need distribution?

 If we're looking at the same equation you definitely do need distribution. Before you even add 9 + 3 you have to multiply 2 to each integer. 2(9 + 3) comes first in the order of operations. solve that and then you divide it by 48.

 

[apocalypz]

Once again, with the way question is written, the answer is two.

 

[waystinthyme]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Only true if 48 / 2 were (48 / 2).
Sorry bro.

doesn't 48÷2 = 48
                           ------ ?
                               2

if so, i don't see your argument.

your answer is only true if 2(9+3) were (2(9+3), which it IS NOT in the original equation.

-waystinthyme

2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3)) which is the extended version. 2(9 + 3) is simplified. It's implied.

i love how the 2 crowd has to 'add' or 'imply' something to get their answer to work...

how about just doing the problem as it's written?

when i saw 48, i didn't 'imply' it was 96(1/2)...when i see 64, i don't imply it's 8^2, etc.

i looked at the problem and solved it as written. why can't you do the same?

-waystinthyme
  

 

[waystinthyme]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Originally Posted by waystinthyme

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Only true if 48 / 2 were (48 / 2).
Sorry bro.

doesn't 48÷2 = 48
                           ------ ?
                               2

if so, i don't see your argument.

your answer is only true if 2(9+3) were (2(9+3), which it IS NOT in the original equation.

-waystinthyme

2(9 + 3) is equivalent to (2 * 1(9 + 3)) which is the extended version. 2(9 + 3) is simplified. It's implied.

i love how the 2 crowd has to 'add' or 'imply' something to get their answer to work...

how about just doing the problem as it's written?

when i saw 48, i didn't 'imply' it was 96(1/2)...when i see 64, i don't imply it's 8^2, etc.

i looked at the problem and solved it as written. why can't you do the same?

-waystinthyme
  

 

[apocalypz]

Once again, with the way question is written, the answer is two.

 

[tj detweiler]

21 pages eh?

 

[stay lurkin]

Originally Posted by Stay Lurkin

BUT, 288 doesn't even check, tho, so how could it possibly be the right answer?

What is this I don't even 

Cmon NT did you really just make me quote myself?

  

 

[tj detweiler]

21 pages eh?