48÷2(9+3)

[soraxd]

i did some research into this, and it turns out, drum roll* in the US we learn PEMDAS, but other countries learn BEDMAS. id like to know what country you are from, and what answer you came up with. i think most of us will agree its either 2 or 288. depending on which order of operations you go by, multiplication and division, hold different precedence. some more research suggests that both of these hold the same precedence, which would explain why two completely different orders of operations can exist, and no one ever raises an eyebrow. so assuming this information is all correct, we can conclude; that depending where you learned math, and who you learned it from, you will have two very different answers. the equation is written very loosely, and normally would have more parenthesis, or brackets, to make it more clear. a problem like this would never come up in real math, and is nothing more than an equation open for interpretation.
have you ever heard of this sentence; "woman without her man is nothing"? without any punctuation its open for two very different interpretations, its a sentence created for nothing but debate, because two very different correct conclusions can come from it. "woman without her man, is nothing" and "woman: without her, man is nothing". the meanings are complete opposites, yet without more punctuation, both could be correct (but i think we all know which one really is, eh? xp)



source 1 University of North Texas
source 2 Northern Michigan University
source 3 Deb Russell
source 4 University of Minnesota Rochester
source 5 Midland College
source 6 Hofstra University

[v300]

Well I live in Japan and I learned the order of operation I listed earlier. I asked my professors here at the US based college I go to and they told me the same. First complete anything within parentheses then brackets, and then evaluate exponents. Multiplication and Division are equal in precedence as long as they are out of parentheses, and you solve from left to right. Adding and subtracting are equal as well going from left to right after completing multiplication and division.

[itsnoiphone]

did you show them it as I wrote it?

[itsnoiphone]

I suppose the next question will be...

Does 0.999... = 1 ??
Age old mathematical argument.

/me goes now.

almost but not quite?

[AmmanBalai]

The church of Google, too funny. That is some strong proof, look out now.....

I didn't actually go on that site straight away if you type into google 'is google God?' and click 'I'm feeling lucky' you get to that

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=is+google+God%3F&l=1

[AmmanBalai]

I suppose the next question will be...

Does 0.999... = 1 ??

Age old mathematical argument.

/me goes now.

almost but not quite?

IT IS!!!!!!!!!!

I'll prove it using the same method used to turn recurring number decimals (e.g. 0.27777777.... or 0.3636363636....) into fractions:

say 0.999999..... is equal to x

then multiply 0.9999999 by 10 to get 9.9999999, which is therefore eqaul to 10x

now write the two equations together

9.9999999=10x
0.9999999=x

subtract 0.99999 from 9.99999 to give 9......and since they equal x and 10x respectively, its the same as subtracting x from 10x to give 9x

so 9=9x

simplify 9=9x, and you get x=1

and that is proper mathematic proof, that you can't deny, no matter what... :P

simples *meerkat squeak*

[v300]

did you show them it as I wrote it?

To my knowledge yes, unless I am missing something O.o

[v300]

IT IS!!!!!!!!!!

I'll prove it using the same method used to turn recurring number decimals (e.g. 0.27777777.... or 0.3636363636....) into fractions:

say 0.999999..... is equal to x

then multiply 0.9999999 by 10 to get 9.9999999, which is therefore eqaul to 10x

now write the two equations together

9.9999999=10x
0.9999999=x

subtract 0.99999 from 9.99999 to give 9......and since they equal x and 10x respectively, its the same as subtracting x from 10x to give 9x

so 9=9x

simplify 9=9x, and you get x=1

and that is proper mathematic proof, that you can't deny, no matter what... :P

simples *meerkat squeak*

An irrational number can not equal a rational number

[Professor Yaffle]

IT IS!!!!!!!!!!

I'll prove it using the same method used to turn recurring number decimals (e.g. 0.27777777.... or 0.3636363636....) into fractions:

say 0.999999..... is equal to x

then multiply 0.9999999 by 10 to get 9.9999999, which is therefore eqaul to 10x

now write the two equations together

9.9999999=10x
0.9999999=x

subtract 0.99999 from 9.99999 to give 9......and since they equal x and 10x respectively, its the same as subtracting x from 10x to give 9x

so 9=9x

simplify 9=9x, and you get x=1

and that is proper mathematic proof, that you can't deny, no matter what... :P

simples *meerkat squeak*

But... 0.9999999 x 10 = 9.999999 surely? I always knew meerkats couldn't count...

Professor Yaffle

[AmmanBalai]

I suppose the next question will be...

Does 0.999... = 1 ??

Age old mathematical argument.

/me goes now.

But... 0.9999999 x 10 = 9.999999 surely? I always knew meerkats couldn't count...

Professor Yaffle

-__-

it's meant to be 0.99999..... and 9.99999.....