Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you even see of what a I am talking about...
The quote is right above it...
Quote:
Here's another 15 + 45/3 - 6*5
If you go left to right, you get 60/3 - 30 or 20 - 30 = -10 which is wrong.
If you do the order of operations, you get 15 + 15 - 30 = 30 - 30 = 0 which is correct.
here you start by the division first,
15+15-6*5,
Then 15+15-30
then you add left to right
30-30, result 0
Clearly I am talking about the equation of 15+45/3-6*5
here you start by the division...
Maybe going back to school is a good choice...
Please read of the whole post before you just pic a small part and opinion on it...
Oh lighten up, clearly I was just kidding around. It's okay...smile! It's obvious you know the difference I was just taking advantage of how your post was laid out.
My guess is that the men responsible for putting their colleague on the moon were more interested in writing formulas in such a way that they would not be easily misinterpreted than in proving how everyone else is a rube for misinterpreting a poorly written expression.
Oh lighten up, clearly I was just kidding around. It's okay...smile! It's obvious you know the difference I was just taking advantage of how your post was laid out.
I agree...it is not apparent at first...however, if you set the equation to x there is no debate!
There is no debate either way. Just because you understand it better when it is set to x doesn't make the original expression debatable.
05-26-2011, 03:19 AM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
It's a faulty expression, probably composed by somebody intending to create an enigma. Any proper algebraist would have expressed it in one of the following two ways:
(48/2)(9+3) = 288
Or
48/[2(9+3)]=2
That's what parentheses are for, and are an integral part of algebraic expression. Leaving out the necessary parentheses is as fatal as leaving out the + sign.
If the person who wrote the expression doesn't know how to properly use algebraic terms, he has no business demanding that others guess what he means. The symbol " ÷ " is inappropriate in an algebraic expression anyway, it should have been " / ", and that itself is proof that the problem was composed by someone who didn't know anything about algebra. But nevertheless, it is badly and ambiguously parenthesized, and it is the responsibility of the person writing the equation to do it correctly and unambiguously, and whoever that was, failed. Proof of that is the mere fact that we are having this discussion.
Seems correct - bad syntax and punctuation.
It should be written as 48/[2(9+3] which = 2
Of course if you write it like 48/2(9+3) then we have the makings for two party mathamatics.
It's a framing issue. Some people will infer the first framing from the the second framing and proceed - others will take it at face value and do the order of operations which yields 288. Parenthesis first then left to right - 48/2 = 24 then 24x12 = 288.
1) How should you write an equation?
2) What are the proper orders of operations?
Then you will have your answers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, 288 is the answer...
It's obvious you know the difference I was just taking advantage of how your post was laid out. 
