48/2(9+3) = x

lol huh? 288/ 48= 6... Which isn't needed to calculate that lol =)

Hope my 2 was correct, being wrong sucks but otherwise wanna know so I can be right.

The way I saw it was outside number of bracket, times inside bracket numbers. To create multiplied version of new figures in the bracket. That whole new bracket of numbers gets divided by the outside number, which is before the slash.

Sometimes there's possibly more than 1 answer that can be given credit to though for different answers, which can be the case with financial ratios. As there's different ratios sometimes taking into account net income for profit etc. As long as the working out is there, should be OK and reasonable justification as to how the answer was found. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_ratio#Ratios

It's funny tho, engineers and mathematicians are arguing this all over the place on the interwebs...

anto_capone wrote:

It's funny tho, engineers and mathematicians are arguing this all over the place on the interwebs...

Personally I find this interesting and think about it whilst cutting an orange, going wow...

Skip to after 1min http://www.metacafe.com/watch/769025/270_degree_triangle_yes_3_right_angles/

Edwin wrote:

I don't think it works that way I'm not much of brains in chemistry Although I'm quite sure the kiddo will be a handsome/beautiful one. *looks at Tel*

Nope. No plans for that.

What's wrong with simply a fluffy kitteh?

anto_capone wrote:

48
___
2(9+3)

The answer is 2 for that one.

I always learned it as PEMDAS. Funny to know there's a different name for it. I dont remember shit that I learned so I'm inclined to say the answer is 24. Parentheis added, then each number outside them multplied by 12 separately and divided.

9+3=12
12*2=24
48*12=576
576/24=24


But then again, I don't remember the rules and it could be that only 2 is multiplied what is in the parenthesis and then it's all added and divided.

Damned soggy memory.

Elois wrote:

I always learned it as PEMDAS. Funny to know there's a different name for it. I dont remember shit that I learned so I'm inclined to say the answer is 24. Parentheis added, then each number outside them multplied by 12 separately and divided.

9+3=12
12*2=24
48*12=576
576/24=24


But then again, I don't remember the rules and it could be that only 2 is multiplied what is in the parenthesis and then it's all added and divided.

Damned soggy memory.

You basically made:

48
2

or even

48 * 12
2 * 12

which is an error as:

12
12

gives 1 and not 12 you have calculated earlier.

Edwin wrote:

anto_capone wrote:

48
___
2(9+3)

The answer is 2 for that one.

its the same thing tho.. the only symbol there is the division symbol, so it can be properly expressed as a fraction.

unless you think it is

48
___ (9+3)
2

But that means it should have been written as 48/2X12 instead of implying the multiplication no? the 2(9+3) needs to be simplified first i think...

You come tutor me, Edwin?

288 by the way I learned it. I was always taught we didn't need a multiplication symbol between a number and a bracket - it being there implied that it was to multiply the result of the brackets.

anto_capone wrote:

Edwin wrote:

anto_capone wrote:

48
___
2(9+3)

The answer is 2 for that one.

its the same thing tho.. the only symbol there is the division symbol, so it can be properly expressed as a fraction.

unless you think it is

48
___ (9+3)
2

But that means it should have been written as 48/2X12 instead of implying the multiplication no? the 2(9+3) needs to be simplified first i think...

Basically the calculators have problem distinguishing between whether it's 48/2 and that multiplied by (9+3) or is it 48 divided by 2 brackets of 9+3. Some of the constructors have assumed that it was two brackets of 9+3 while others that the fractal is then multiplied by it. Therefore the confusion. The machine doesn't know should it divide by the 12 or multiply by it... That is totally dependant on if the manufacturer decided to take short cuts or not

unless they really changed the math since i was in school
in my head real fast i came up with 2

i graduated hs in 72

Telcara wrote:

... *head explodes*

*nods* Actually, I am contemplating crawling under the desk and crying.

I am gearing up to study for the GRE (yup, I have to get ready to get ready) and am having massive anxiety about the math portion. I'd love a tutor, but am terribly embarassed as to how stupid I am about numbers.

Instead, I will partially read your posts in awe and confusion.

James wrote:

Bekah wrote:

Under the principals of bodmas, brackets get calculated first so that would be the 9 + 3 = 12, then you have to do the division and multiplication, left to right so you have 48 /2 = 12 x 12 = 288 So it seems that the logic function of a couple of those calculators is incorrectly input. Just goes to show you that the brain is not about to replaced anytime soon

Right answer Bekah, but 48/2 is 24 not 12

x = 48 / 2 (9 + 3)
x = 48 / 2 (12) <-- Brackets are first
x = 24 * 12 <-- Division and Multiplication from left to right so first 48 / 2
x = 24 * 12 <-- then 24 * 12
x = 288

This is the correct answer to the thread title as written.

You take care of brackets first and then it must be interpreted as " 48 / 2 * 12 = x " and you have to calculate from left to right, division and multiplication commands bearing the same weight.

The problem is that in calculators and on forums because of line spacing and all that, we don't have a good way of consistently expressing

anto wrote:

48
______ =x
2(9+3)

Which for the answer indeed is 2. It's the same as writing it like this:



In anto's example, 2(9+3) is the denominator. It's not the same as " 48/2(9+3) = x "; When expressed this way, it's not a fraction, or in other words the whole equation has a denominator of 1.

My hero!

*flutters her eyelashes at him*

So this mathematician is wrong?

Quote :

The distributive property of multiplication CLEARLY states that the 2(9+3) is an entire statement and CANNOT be broken up. 2(9+3) follows the distributive property which can be rewritten as (2*9+2*3). Let me repeat the 2 outside of the parenthesis follows the distributive property of multiplication and must be factored and simplified before performing any other operations on it. You do NOT compute this expression from left to right until you use Algebra to simplify the statement 2(9+3).

So this can be rewritten as:
48 / (2*9 + 2*3)

Which leaves us with

48 / 24 = 2

Answer = 2.

must be

Anto is correct here in the technical sense -- brackets don't necessarily indicate algebraic expression, but solving for X does. The problem is in the way the problem is expressed in the thread title

48/2(9+3) = x

There are no variables in the subject - it's a monomial equation and I wouldn't be compelled to distribute the 2 through the parentheses with the problem spaced like that. It's better written with spacing,

48 / 2(9+3)

then it's understood the way Anto says (and generally if it's expected you'll distribute through a side of an equation with no variables it will be expressed with brackets, not just parentheses)

48 / [2(9+3) + 0] = x

I wouldn't mark anyone off for answering 288. Spacing is important

anto_capone wrote:

So this mathematician is wrong?

Quote :

The distributive property of multiplication CLEARLY states that the 2(9+3) is an entire statement and CANNOT be broken up. 2(9+3) follows the distributive property which can be rewritten as (2*9+2*3). Let me repeat the 2 outside of the parenthesis follows the distributive property of multiplication and must be factored and simplified before performing any other operations on it. You do NOT compute this expression from left to right until you use Algebra to simplify the statement 2(9+3).

So this can be rewritten as:
48 / (2*9 + 2*3)

Which leaves us with

48 / 24 = 2

Answer = 2.

No, but he doesn't know a bit about programming calculators

The answer is two.


EDIT: I should probably say why I thinks its two since all the adults are doing it.


But, now that you bastards made me over think it. My opinion is that 288 and 2


48/2(9+3) = 2
48/2(12)
48/24=2

Thats the answer I'd pick.

But it could by the way i was thought BIRDMAS

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


ACTUALLY.... I just realised why it can't be 288 even with birdmas...

The bracket is still there last and they have to go first so it has to be 2. Errrr, right?

I think this is 288, but i change my mind . This is 2 (if you look in other side)

Because this (can be) isnt

48
--- x (9+3)
2


This (can) be

48
----
2(9+3)

so the answer is simple


I think this is about how we look at this

I thought I would test people's maths skills once again. What is the answer to this problem?

4 x 4 + 4 x 4 +4 - 4 x 4 = ?


And don't worry, 73% of people get it wrong

Bekah wrote:

I thought I would test people's maths skills once again. What is the answer to this problem?

4 x 4 + 4 x 4 +4 - 4 x 4 = ?


And don't worry, 73% of people get it wrong

20? (took me forever! lol and I still don't think it's right haha)

Holy crap, had an awful vision of me in math class 15+yrs ago...*shudders*

I think Trinity is right.

4 x 4 + 4 x 4 +4 - 4 x 4 = ?

16 + 16 + 4 - 16 = ?

36 - 16 = 20

Bekah wrote:

I thought I would test people's maths skills once again. What is the answer to this problem?

4 x 4 + 4 x 4 +4 - 4 x 4 = ?


And don't worry, 73% of people get it wrong

16+ 16 + 4 - 16 =

36 - 16 = 20

I think Aoife is right that Trinity is right :-)

The rule is you do exponents first, then square roots then parenthesis then multiplication then division the addition then subtraction