48÷2(9+3)

[. ._]

Doh! I get it now. I guess that's why ya use brackets in math- to present and organise a little better.

Page 4. heheheh

[Cap'n P8]

But poll winner is 2!

That's okay, you can't all be in the top percentile.

[trampbike]

I have a Sharp scientific calculator,

When I type the equation in as 48/2(9+3) it gives an answer of 2.
When I type it in as 48/2*(9+3) it gives an answer of 288.

No word of a lie. try it.

Damn calculators!
If you don't type in the multiplication sign on a Sharp calculator, it means you imply the parenthesis. It makes the job faster when you have a long equation full of parenthesis. So if you write it down exactly like this : 48/2(9+3), the Sharp does: 48/(2*(9+3)), which of course equals 2. BUT, the original question was 48÷2(9+3)=?, and when it's written like this, it means (48/2)*(9+3)=288

[NAT2]

I'm kind of curious as to the education levels in relation to the answers.
I say 288, without hesitance (Bsc & Ms).

[Frank Gallagher]

I'm kind of curious as to the education levels in relation to the answers.
I say 288, without hesitance (Bsc & Ms).

I have Grade 12 did Grade 6 twice

288

[ArcticKat]

I'm kind of curious as to the education levels in relation to the answers.
I say 288, without hesitance (Bsc & Ms).

B.H.Sc., Mensa Member.

[wowo]

B.Sc. Computer Science

288

[Cap'n P8]

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

288

[iflyforpie]

Grease monkey and piolet.

288

[Dex]

I would assume implied multiplication and multiplication by juxtaposition would take priority over explicit multiplication and division in the order of operations. a/bc= vs a/b*c= . Which would give me an answer of 2. Of Course I could use the distributive laws first and do 48/2(9+3)= 48/(18+6)= 48/24= which would give me an answer of 2 as well.

[azimuthaviation]

But poll winner is 2!

Still believe in democracy people??

[tca]

B.Sc (physics & math)... I vote 2

This is one of the problems involved in trying to convert what should have been an incredibly simple problem into a one line computerized format. Proper bracketing would remove the ambiguity, but as mentioned above the lack of an * operator implies that the 2 should be associated with the brackets at the time of their execution. Consider it the function y=48/2x, at the x value of 9 + 3.

[gustind]

One of them guys with a Seneca jacket.

288.

[iflyforpie]

Of Course I could use the distributive laws first and do 48/2(9+3)= 48/(18+6)= 48/24= which would give me an answer of 2 as well.

You can't ignore 48 though when doing the distributive method, as it would be included in a function a(x+y). So you have to divide 48 by 2 first to give you 24, then do distributive multiplication to give you 216 + 72 = 288.

[Dex]

Looking closer, I will retract my distributive example it is wrong. I still stand by my original point though.

[ArcticKat]

But poll winner is 2!

Still believe in democracy people??

And we wonder how the Conservatives have managed to remain in power for as long as they have?

[ballstothewall69]

I pick things up and put them down!

[hz2p]

B.Sc (physics & math)... I vote 2

Ask for a refund on your tuition.

[Just another canuck]

I can not believe this has gone so far... Wow!!

I believe Nark stated it in the beginning. The 2 belongs to the bracketed part of the equation, therefore must be completed before the division. BEDMAS would still apply.

2(9+3) is the same thing as writing [(2x9) + (2x3)]

The answer is NOT 288... the answer is 2.

48/2(9+3) is the same thing as writing 48/[2(9+3)]... the first one can obviously cause some confusion though.

[erics2b]

I can not believe this has gone so far... Wow!!

I believe Nark stated it in the beginning. The 2 belongs to the bracketed part of the equation, therefore must be completed before the division. BEDMAS would still apply.

2(9+3) is the same thing as writing [(2x9) + (2x3)]

The answer is NOT 288... the answer is 2.

48/2(9+3) is the same thing as writing 48/[2(9+3)]... the first one can obviously cause some confusion though.

48/2(9+3)

Brackets: Evaluate all expressions within brackets.
48/2(12)
Exponents: none
Division/Multiplication: Do from left to right.
24(12)
288
Addition/Subtraction: none

Y'all are a bunch of dumb mofo's.

[AOW]

everyone agrees (except for those who believe that 9+3=11...) that 48÷2*(9+3)=288 and 48÷(2(9+3))=2.
Without the brackets or the operator, as the OP wrote it, it is easy to understand the debate. It would be so simple in traditional format, with an obvious dividend and divisor, with a solid line separating the two.

This is not unique to this site. from wikipedia:

Some mathematicians hold that multiplication by juxtaposition (omitting the x sign, ex. 2(4+3) ) is a symbol of grouping. No fixed convention exists.

and

This next example displays an issue that almost never arises but, when it does, there seems to be no end to the arguing.

Simplify 16 ÷ 2[8 – 3(4 – 2)] + 1.
16 ÷ 2[8 – 3(4 – 2)] + 1
= 16 ÷ 2[8 – 3(2)] + 1
= 16 ÷ 2[8 – 6] + 1
= 16 ÷ 2[2] + 1 (**)
= 16 ÷ 4 + 1
= 4 + 1
= 5

The confusing part in the above calculation is how "16 divided by 2[2] + 1" (in the line marked with the double-star) becomes "16 divided by 4 + 1", instead of "8 times by 2 + 1". That's because, even though multiplication and division are at the same level (so the left-to-right rule should apply), parentheses outrank division, so the first 2 goes with the [2], rather than with the "16 divided by". That is, multiplication that is indicated by placement against parentheses (or brackets, etc) is "stronger" than "regular" multiplication. Typesetting the entire problem in a graphing calculator verifies this hierarchy:
Note that different software will process this differently; even different models of Texas Instruments graphing calculators will process this differently. In cases of ambiguity, be very careful of your parentheses, and make your meaning clear. The general consensus among math people is that "multiplication by juxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next to each other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations. But not all software is programmed this way, and sometimes teachers view things differently. If in doubt, ask!

(And please do not send me an e-mail either asking for or else proffering a definitive verdict on this issue. As far as I know, there is no such final verdict. And telling me to do this your way will not solve the issue!)

So you can count me on the 2 side, but I will argue that it is an unfair and ambiguous question.

[Koopa]

I'm using this thread as the prime example to show non-aviation types when they ask me "Don't you have to be great at math to be a pilot?"

[Dex]

I'm using this thread as the prime example to show non-aviation types when they ask me "Don't you have to be great at math to be a pilot?"

Well, you will only look the fool doing it. Do some research, mathematicians are debating this and come up with two different answers. To suggest one side is stupid for coming up with one answer over the other just shows ignorance. But hey, have at'er , you da man!!!!

[Koopa]

I'm using this thread as the prime example to show non-aviation types when they ask me "Don't you have to be great at math to be a pilot?"

Well, you will only look the fool doing it. Do some research, mathematicians are debating this and come up with two different answers. To suggest one side is stupid for coming up with one answer over the other just shows ignorance. But hey, have at'er , you da man!!!!

Oh, I fully admit to tl;dr-ing most of this post.

But I digress.

[ArcticKat]

I'm using this thread as the prime example to show non-aviation types when they ask me "Don't you have to be great at math to be a pilot?"

Well, you will only look the fool doing it. Do some research, mathematicians are debating this and come up with two different answers. To suggest one side is stupid for coming up with one answer over the other just shows ignorance. But hey, have at'er , you da man!!!!

He never said anything about one side or the other of this debate being stupid. What I take from his post is that he is showing people this thread and letting them decide for themselves which of you is stupid. Personally, I think both sides have very valid arguments and people far above my pay grade have obviously been stymied by this problem. I think most people will make their determinations on the intelligence of the aviation community based on the civility of the debaters rather than the debate itself.