48÷2(9+3)

[Expat]

Arctic,
Without getting personal, I think you are from that new generation that cannot get us back to the moon. That generation that is always right...
When was the last time you used a slide rule???

[paddy]

"]

No worries, I'm not here to defend my position because I no right,

Of course, I am mistaken.

\]

Two can play at that game!

[cdnpilot77]

x is used in math as a place holder for an unknown

If you agree that 48/2x=2 where x = 12 then the same process must be applied when x is known, in this instance (9+3)

So to make it the same and not answer a different equation all together you could read it as

48/2(x)=
NOT 48/2x


We know that x= 12
so it becomes 48/2(12)
Which is the same as 48/2*12
which then becomes 24*12
which = 288

This is crazy

[paddy]

q

[wowo]

No you're right. It's the same thing. 2(9 + 3) = 2 * (9 + 3). The multiplication symbol is implied when you put a number beside the parentheses.

The answer is the same but the operation is not; though 2x = 2*x the difference is 2x is one number while 2*x has two, both the x and the 2, this is why the order of operation is to complete the 2x prior to the division.

I LOL'd at this. 2x is still two numbers: 2 and x. There is absolutely no difference between 2x and 2*x.

There are a million other threads about this very same topic all over the internet, and I don't think any of them have reached a consensus. I'm not going to comment on this any further but please try using any calculator made in the last 20 years, or look at what either of these two reputable web sites have to say:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48 ... 289%2B3%29
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=ch ... B72(9%2B3)

You'd think Google or Wolfram would know how to do simple math, no?

[ArcticKat]

Arctic,
Without getting personal, I think you are from that new generation that cannot get us back to the moon. That generation that is always right...

And how is that not getting personal? That's no different than me saying...Not to get personal, but you're an idiot. But I'm not so passionate about this topic as to make ad hominem attacks in an attempt to degrade my opponent in this debate and elevate myself.

When was the last time you used a slide rule???

In High School.

I can admit when I'm wrong, and I do admit when I am wrong when the evidence disproves my position. In this instance, I do not believe I am wrong and I have seen no evidence, only incorrect math equations. If I am proven to be incorrect, I will eat crow, but so far my 12 year old and my 15 year old both get the same answer I do as well as every online math software I've tried.

"]

No worries, I'm not here to defend my position because I no right,

Of course, I am mistaken.

\]

Two can play at that game!

What game would that be? I quoted you verbatim and in context, where in this thread did I make those statements you're attempting to peg on me?

[azimuthaviation]

25/(21+25)= 54% of avcanadians are unable to do grade 7 math. all ya need to know

[ArcticKat]

+1

and for everyone who thinks the answer is 2...37/37(17-18).

[Lemon]

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.

[Siddley Hawker]

I prefer the simple equations myself.

[mdscientist61]

Oh no, it looks like the team I'm cheering for is losing. Come on team, we need more people to vote for 288.

If you start with this: 48/2(9+3)

you have to realize that the multiplication sign between the 2 and the parentheses is implied, as other people have already explained.

You also have to realize that the divide-by-two has to be the equivalent of multiply-by-0.5

So you can re-write the equation like this.

(48)*(1/2)*(9+3)

and you get 288.

Hmm, I never realized before that mathematics was a democracy. I always thought it was based on logical proof.

Now will somebody *please* post some pictures of lovely cheer-leaders to encourage more people to vote for 288.

Next week, we can vote to repeal the law of gravity. That would be impressive.

[mdscientist61]

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.

Wow that is scary stuff. Let's do an experiment with a hypothetical situation.

Imagine I've just bought a nice new airplane that burns 48 gallons-per-hour.
It has two fuel tanks, one in each wing.
I'm going to fly it to an island in the middle of a shark-infested ocean. The island is 9 hours of flying time away.
I'm planning to carry 3 hours of reserve fuel because my wife is one of my passengers and we really dislike sharks.

So in my new pilot's handbook for the airplane the equation for gallons of fuel to be carried in each one of the two tanks is:
(48 gallons-per-hour)/(2 tanks)( 9 hours + 3 hours)

and I enter it in my Sharp Scientific Calculator as

48/2(9+3)

[culver10]

[AOW]

I prefer the simple equations myself.

Ok, am I the only one who is bothered by this? First of all, what are the limits of integration, and what is the variable of integration?

Second, if we assume that the variable of integration is dx, then the solution is e^x + k, so where the heck does u^n come into the picture?

Somebody should tell that girl that perhaps people would pay attention to her for her mind, and not just her body, if she could bother to integrate properly!

[Lemon]

AOW - yes, you are the only one bothered by that. ha

[Lemon]

. double post

[mdscientist61]

48÷2(9+3)
Whats the answer?

Wait a minute, it just dawned on me where all this is coming from.

Hey Steve, is this the skill-testing question on the back of your winning lottery ticket?

[Cap'n P8]

As a few people have already mentioned, it comes down to order of operations.

BEDMAS (or PEDMAS for the older generation)

The key here is that both the "DM" and "AS" parts of the that acronym are required to be done as they occur FROM LEFT TO RIGHT.

Therefore:

48 has to be divided by 2 giving you 24, before you can multiply by the 12.

Also keep in mind that the formula as written is:

48*(9+3)
2

And not this:

48
2(9+3)

Which it would have been, if the original formula was written as:

48/(2(9+3))

[mcrit]

The above would be correct IF the initial expression were as follows:

48 ÷ (2(9+3)) = 2

48÷2(9+3) = 48 ÷ 2 x 12 = 48 x 12 = 288 = (48(12))/2

BEDMAS people

DOH!

You have the right of it sir. My degree was organic chemistry which means I spent 4 years locked in rooms filled with solvents. I blame that for my faulty neurons.

[Cap'n P8]

Let's look at this another way, since the brackets seem to be getting everybody flustered.

a = 48
b = 2
c = (9+3)

Now forget the numbers for a minute and just look at the letters:

x = a/b*c

You're telling me there are people here suggesting they would multiply the "b" and "c" before they would divide the "a" and "b", ie. RIGHT TO LEFT?

[BigglesNBella]

Having taken what seems like an endless stream of math and calculus classes at university I can say that no prof or text author would ever present this question like that. It would either appear as (48/2)(9+3) or 48/(2(9+3)). Using BEDMAS from elementary school you get 288 but because of the presentation of the problem my first instinct was to multiply the 2 through 12 before performing the division. I'm guessing that this why so many people got 2 as their answer.

Even google automatically adds brackets to clarify the equality!

http://tinyurl.com/62s6j5x

[beaverbob]

It's all Harpers fault.
Everybody is confused between left and right.

[. ._]

WOW!

I just copied pilotsteve's equation and pasted it into Google.

Answer=288

I can't believe Google would not do the proper order of operations on that.

I also can't believe this thread has gone 3 pages!

[Cap'n P8]

It did...

...hence the correct answer.

288

[Expat]

But poll winner is 2!