novabrkr said:

The answer is 1.

It doesn't suffice to just "solve what's inside the parentheses first". You have to eliminate ("get rid of") them as well.

The order of operation.... parentheses, multiplication and division.

6/2(1+2) is...

6/2*3 = 1

===========

[Edited 12/30/12 16:19pm]

Is it on?

babynoz said:

SOme of you are correct, and others need to immediately call the suicide hotline nearest you since you're self esteems are so low anyways and I have bad news for you.

But first, a hint:

PLEASE EXCUSE MY DEAR AUNT SIRIPORN

Parenthesis , exponents, (Multiplication & division), (addition & subtraction)

imago said:

SOme of you are correct, and others need to immediately call the suicide hotline nearest you since you're self esteems are so low anyways and I have bad news for you.

But first, a hint:

PLEASE EXCUSE MY DEAR AUNT SIRIPORN

Parenthesis , exponents, (Multiplication & division), (addition & subtraction)

[img:$uid]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y240/delivertheword/misc/Madea.gif[/img:$uid]

TD3 said:

babynoz said:

Thanks, I needed that.

TD3 said:

novabrkr said:

The answer is 1.

It doesn't suffice to just "solve what's inside the parentheses first". You have to eliminate ("get rid of") them as well.

The order of operation.... parentheses, multiplication and division.

6/2(1+2) is...

6/2*3 = 1

===========

[Edited 12/30/12 16:19pm]

No, sorry. I was wrong.

I didn't edit that comment before you quoted it. There is no such rule according to the current standards of how these things are done.

Once you go from,

6÷2(1+2)

to

6÷2(3)

it really is

6÷2x3

and not

6÷(2x3) - that's wrong.

Yeah, for no other damn reason than convention. That's just how the syntax is parsed and there's no two ways about it.

This example is an Internet meme designed to fool you in various ways so that you might come up with the answer being "1". I got it wrong myself twice, because of two different reasons. Then I looked it up on the Internet and saw people giving all kinds of bullshit reasonings for why it's supposed to be 1. There are also all kinds of bullshit explanations to why the answer is 9 too.

The answer is 9 in any case. It's just a smartass way to write "three times three".

novabrkr said:

TD3 said:

The order of operation.... parentheses, multiplication and division.

6/2(1+2) is...

6/2*3 = 1

===========

[Edited 12/30/12 16:19pm]

No, sorry. I was wrong.

I didn't edit that comment before you quoted it. There is no such rule according to the current standards of how these things are done.

Once you go from,

6÷2(1+2)

to

6÷2(3)

it really is

6÷2x3

and not

6÷(2x3) - that's wrong.

Yeah, for no other damn reason than convention. That's just how the syntax is parsed and there's no two ways about it.

This example is an Internet meme designed to fool you in various ways so that you might come up with the answer being "1". I got it wrong myself twice, because of two different reasons. Then I looked it up on the Internet and saw people giving all kinds of bullshit reasonings for why it's supposed to be 1. There are also all kinds of bullshit explanations to why the answer is 9 too.

The answer is 9 in any case. It's just a smartass way to write "three times three".

Yep, you are sooooo right; After looking at the equation again. The Order of Operations are: parentheses, division then multiplication. Parentheses first, moving left to right .

It's a serious topic.

I'm kind of glad that imago posted it, even if it made me feel quite stupid. I never realized how visually orientated I am when dealing with mathematics until now. Once you're out of high school you don't really have to worry about the syntax in the written format so much. People don't use mathematics to just solve pointless "puzzles" in general (which is what education in these matters prior to college level is largely about).

novabrkr said:

It's a serious topic.

I'm kind of glad that imago posted it, even if it made me feel quite stupid. I never realized how visually orientated I am when dealing with mathematics until now. Once you're out of high school you don't really have to worry about the syntax in the written format so much. People don't use mathematics to just solve pointless "puzzles" in general (which is what education in these matters prior to college level is largely about).

In general, true. There are math puzzle books (yes, I actually know this), and there are some more practical and challenging math classes in high school these days (if you chose to take them). But for the most part, that's very true. Most math, from a very young age, through high school, is just advancing levels of reapeating problem types/formulas. Particularly if you never go beyond the state requirements for graduation. I've been noticing this with my niece and nephews over the last few years.

Unfortunately, math is a large part of how I make my income.

This is intended as a puzzle that's based on the correct interpretation of the symbols. It's not really a mathematical problem as such. In any case, you can get it easily wrong if you're careless. It's a bit worrying if so many people (including myself) get it wrong.

I just found a discussion on this on a site that's for ENGINEERS and about half of them got it wrong.

Some say, both, 1 and 9 are correct. The more I look at it there's no chance it can be 1 though.

[Edited 12/31/12 1:47am]

My math is a little rusty but I'm surprised nobody has answered 7. I looked at it as if there was an a and b in the parenthesis.

So for instance 6/ 2(a+b) would be 6/ 2a+ 2b. Plug the 1 and 2 back in and you get 6/2 + 4. 3+4 = 7.

Now, if the parenthesis isn't meant for distributing the multiplier of 2 then you have 6/2x3 which equals 9.

[Edited 12/31/12 4:24am]

whodknee said:

My math is a little rusty but I'm surprised nobody has answered 7. I looked at it as if there was an a and b in the parenthesis.

So for instance 6/ 2(a+b) would be 6/ 2a+ 2b. Plug the 1 and 2 back in and you get 6/2 + 4. 3+4 = 7.

No, that would be:

6/2(a) + 6/2(b)

Which can be turned into:

3a + 3b

When you put the numbers back in there you get:

(3 x 1) + (3 x 2)

And further:

3+6

Which is:

9

There's no two ways about it.

What the original expression really says is:

6

(---) x (1+2)

2

The multiplier is 6/2, not 2. In other words, the multiplier is 3 presented as an unnecessary fraction and the fraction is expressed with a division symbol. That's just due to conventions that allow abbreviations in certain ways. In this case it doesn't add clarity, but the attempt is to deliberately confuse people. It's just computer math syntax presented in a way that no one would use in a math textbook.

[Edited 12/31/12 5:11am]

^ i wonder what the mathematical probability is of him going too far with the hair toss and permanently burying his whole head in his wobbly belly bits

.

[Edited 12/31/12 5:26am]

MoBetterBliss said:

^ i wonder what the mathematical probability is of him going too far with the hair toss and permanently burying his whole head in his wobbly belly bits

9.

novabrkr said:

whodknee said:

My math is a little rusty but I'm surprised nobody has answered 7. I looked at it as if there was an a and b in the parenthesis.

So for instance 6/ 2(a+b) would be 6/ 2a+ 2b. Plug the 1 and 2 back in and you get 6/2 + 4. 3+4 = 7.

No, that would be:

6/2(a) + 6/2(b)

Which can be turned into:

3a + 3b

When you put the numbers back in there you get:

(3 x 1) + (3 x 2)

And further:

3+6

Which is:

9

There's no two ways about it.

What the original expression really says is:

6

(---) x (1+2)

2

The multiplier is 6/2, not 2. In other words, the multiplier is 3 presented as an unnecessary fraction and the fraction is expressed with a division symbol. That's just due to conventions that allow abbreviations in certain ways. In this case it doesn't add clarity, but the attempt is to deliberately confuse people. It's just computer math syntax presented in a way that no one would use in a math textbook.

[Edited 12/31/12 5:11am]

You missed my edit. I wasn't sure whether the parenthesis takes priority over the division. For argument's sake I assumed it did. Without a context to put it in you have to be familiar with these rules of mathematics. There's obviously a much clearer way to present this equation. Damn you Imago!

7? So it all comes down to you get the answers based on what rules you follow. Is this one of those who makes the rules thingies? One now never knows around here sometimes.

9.

*Wipes sweat off forehead*

I knew basic math in highschool would come in handy someday.

The only correct answer is that the calculation is ambiguous. That's why the ÷ sign isn't used in "proper" maths anymore, because it's simply impractical and ambiguous. You either use a fraction line or help yourself with another set of brackets.

So, there would be two possible answers to this calculation: 1 and 9.

Practically, however, this type of calculation should not exist. Arriving at a calculation like this would actually be considered a mistake, because ambiguous calculations do not exist in reality. If this is the shortened version of a much longer calculation, you are likely to have missed a set of brackets.

So, the only real conclusion is:

You are stupid.

Dave1992 said:

The only correct answer is that the calculation is ambiguous. That's why the ÷ sign isn't used in "proper" maths anymore, because it's simply impractical and ambiguous. You either use a fraction line or help yourself with another set of brackets.

So, there would be two possible answers to this calculation: 1 and 9.

Practically, however, this type of calculation should not exist. Arriving at a calculation like this would actually be considered a mistake, because ambiguous calculations do not exist in reality. If this is the shortened version of a much longer calculation, you are likely to have missed a set of brackets.

So, the only real conclusion is:

You are stupid.

Dave1992 said:

The only correct answer is that the calculation is ambiguous. That's why the ÷ sign isn't used in "proper" maths anymore, because it's simply impractical and ambiguous. You either use a fraction line or help yourself with another set of brackets.

So, there would be two possible answers to this calculation: 1 and 9.

Practically, however, this type of calculation should not exist. Arriving at a calculation like this would actually be considered a mistake, because ambiguous calculations do not exist in reality. If this is the shortened version of a much longer calculation, you are likely to have missed a set of brackets.

So, the only real conclusion is:

You are stupid.

This is all too embarassing, yall. All too embarassing.

PEMDAS is the order of operation; howevver, multiplicaion and division are equal to each other, as addition and subtraction are equal to each other.

The reason is that division is just inverse multiplicationl (the fraction mentioned above), and that there really is no subtraction, because subtraction is just the addition of a negative integer. Ergo, when you have multiplaction and division, you simply work from left to right. Likewise, when you have addition and subjtraction, you work from left to right. The only answer possible is 9.

PEMDAS looks like this

GO LEFT TO RIGHT IN THIS ORDER: Parenthesis, exponents, [multiplcation & division], then [addition and subtraction].

Ergo, 9.

it doesn't matter if you represent a number as pi, 3.14... or 22/7 or 22÷7, you still need an order of operation when figuring the math.

For example, adding 1 to pi, would be 1 + 3.14... which you would arrive at 4.14... which is easy enough. But, for 22 ÷ 7 + 1, to arrive at 4, you need to follow the order of operation exactly.

Yall embarass me so much I'm going to stop posting indefinately until I've noticed your math improves over this year. Good day!

.

[Edited 12/31/12 17:23pm]

Dave1992 said:

The only correct answer is that the calculation is ambiguous. That's why the ÷ sign isn't used in "proper" maths anymore, because it's simply impractical and ambiguous. You either use a fraction line or help yourself with another set of brackets.

So, there would be two possible answers to this calculation: 1 and 9.

Practically, however, this type of calculation should not exist. Arriving at a calculation like this would actually be considered a mistake, because ambiguous calculations do not exist in reality. If this is the shortened version of a much longer calculation, you are likely to have missed a set of brackets.

So, the only real conclusion is:

You are stupid.

Actually, they do.

There are several caculations (though this one is not one of them because it is not ambigious) in math in which there are two possible answers to the equation.

Ofcourse, I may be getting lost in semantics. Suffice it to say, there is only one possible answer to this equation given the rules to the order of operations, if they are learned properly and followed. Ergo, this equation is neither ambigious nor is the order of operations which one must follow to arrive at the answer. Failure to do so is not the fault of the question, but of the learner.

This message is for everyone on this thread: I want to quote Steve Jobs in something very poingant that he said to the CEO of Sony, RCA and several other prominent execs in the music industry during a private closed door meeting.

"You all have your heads up your asses."

GROUP. HUG.

imago said:

This is all too embarassing, yall. All too embarassing.

PEMDAS is the order of operation; howevver, multiplicaion and division are equal to each other, as addition and subtraction are equal to each other.

The reason is that division is just inverse multiplicationl (the fraction mentioned above), and that there really is no subtraction, because subtraction is just the addition of a negative integer. Ergo, when you have multiplaction and division, you simply work from left to right. Likewise, when you have addition and subjtraction, you work from left to right. The only answer possible is 9.

PEMDAS looks like this

GO LEFT TO RIGHT IN THIS ORDER: Parenthesis, exponents, [multiplcation & division], then [addition and subtraction].

Ergo, 9.

it doesn't matter if you represent a number as pi, 3.14... or 22/7 or 22÷7, you still need an order of operation when figuring the math.

For example, adding 1 to pi, would be 1 + 3.14... which you would arrive at 4.14... which is easy enough. But, for 22 ÷ 7 + 1, to arrive at 4, you need to follow the order of operation exactly.

Yall embarass me so much I'm going to stop posting indefinately until I've noticed your math improves over this year. Good day!

.

[Edited 12/31/12 17:23pm]

yeah...no

NDRU said:

imago said:

This is all too embarassing, yall. All too embarassing.

PEMDAS is the order of operation; howevver, multiplicaion and division are equal to each other, as addition and subtraction are equal to each other.

The reason is that division is just inverse multiplicationl (the fraction mentioned above), and that there really is no subtraction, because subtraction is just the addition of a negative integer. Ergo, when you have multiplaction and division, you simply work from left to right. Likewise, when you have addition and subjtraction, you work from left to right. The only answer possible is 9.

PEMDAS looks like this

GO LEFT TO RIGHT IN THIS ORDER: Parenthesis, exponents, [multiplcation & division], then [addition and subtraction].

Ergo, 9.

it doesn't matter if you represent a number as pi, 3.14... or 22/7 or 22÷7, you still need an order of operation when figuring the math.

For example, adding 1 to pi, would be 1 + 3.14... which you would arrive at 4.14... which is easy enough. But, for 22 ÷ 7 + 1, to arrive at 4, you need to follow the order of operation exactly.

Yall embarass me so much I'm going to stop posting indefinately until I've noticed your math improves over this year. Good day!

.

[Edited 12/31/12 17:23pm]

yeah...no

Some people get confused by 2(3), but 2(3) is another way of writing 2 x 3.

I'm so embarassed, yall. I'm leaving the org until your math skills have improved.

Good bye.

And NDRU's math is the most embarassing of them all.

I can't take this anymore. ANYMORE.

GOOD.....BYE........