Wow... didn't know that I had fellow Math Geeks here

[jeSteR]

Here's one for you then.

48÷2(9+3)=?

It's been out there a while and the only reason that there's ambiguity is because it is a poorly written equation... still, the debate is going... do distributive properties override the PEMDAS order?

[joel]

i learned the BODMAS acronym for order. i chose 288, i interpreted as 48 / 2 * 12 and considered the lack of a * just as short form, but that it should indeed be there. I can understand it interpreted either way.

[se7entse7en]

Well... I'd say 2. The equation is poorly written, yet it was written that way for a reason and I'd be tempted to try and read their mind. ie. it would seem to me the intention is for the 2 to be part of the parenthesis.

However, if this was entered into a computer program designed to solve math problems (ie MathCad, Maple, etc), I have a feeling it would say 288.

[jeSteR]

[joel]

nice to know there is no consistency between calculator makes...

[supersuk]

its two.

[Duncan]

yes, poorly written but i think
48÷2(9+3)=2
and
48/2(9+3)=288 (48/2 being a fraction)

whoa, i googled the equation and it seems to be a huge debate

[Duncan]

lol, but using sql, i tried to run "select 48/2*(9+3)" and i get 288... heh...

[se7entse7en]

haha... Well... I have a Ti-85, so I guess it's settled. The answer is 2.

Oh, and in my opinion, the '*' makes a difference.

- A person with a watch knows the time. A person with two watches is never sure.

[joel]

looks like it's tied here with 2 votes either way..

[supersuk]

lol i just linked this question to a few co workers of mine and single handedly destroyed productivity for whole team for about 30 mins.

lol we even gathered around a white board putting down formulas and etc for like 20 minutes. Kinda looked like a scene out of big bang theory.

[nature boy]

i voted for 288.

but if there were an option "it doesn't really matter now get back to work", i probably would have voted for 288 still.

[nature boy]

try this one:
So y = r cubed over 3. And if you determine the rate of change in this curve correctly, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.














rdrr get it?









har dee har har

[se7entse7en]

[joel]