Math poll going viral on Facebook

[fried eggs]

Can you solve this problem:

48 ÷ 2(9+3)

[Jackpine Radical]

1. 2

[WolverineDG]

19. yup nt

[demwing]

98. PEMDAS

Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally (PEMDAS)

Parenthesis
Exponents
(then, working left to right)
Multiplication / Division
Addition / Subtraction

48/2*(9+3) = (48/2)*12 = 24*12 = 288

[WolverineDG]

140. That's not the way it's written nt

[KittyWampus]

2. is the answer

2?

48/24= 2

[Lucian]

3. Order of operations problem.

288 is the answer.

Not 24.

[girl gone mad]

9. Please excuse my dear aunt sally. n/t

[tridim]

14. Yep.

But for clarity I would write it like..

(48/2)*(9+3)

[Lucian]

17. Yep.

288 is the answer.

[ThomWV]

4. Why?

I would presume that anyone who has made it past about the 6th grade should be able to solve that particular problem. I suppose that's not the case though, I suppose we'll discover that only one adult in a crowd can do it, and virtually no children. Such is modern life.

[Maru Kitteh]

134. Are you kidding? Watch the average adult 18 - 40 make change for really any ordinary transaction

without the aid (crutch) of a calculator or cash register.

[LoveIsNow]

5. Yeah

2.
It's 48 divided by 24

[Cali_Democrat]

6. 2

[malaise]

7. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwpWw-iVKHc

[KittyWampus]

25. LOL!

[some guy]

123. I'm gonna go with 2

'cause who wants to be on Adolph's side. :D

Thanks!

[RandomThoughts]

8. Do you mean.

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

Standard order would be 288
assumed order would be 2


You left out a * so it could be a bit ambiguous

[malaise]

10. Where should I send your beer

:evilgrin:

[golddigger]

20. And your travel money.

[RandomThoughts]

28. Those with that capability have my address.

I have posted my name and location many times.

Robert Eastwood
Normandy Park, Wa.

[lumberjack_jeff]

11. Of course. n/t

[Zoigal]

12. how about 288 ?.....z

[Lucian]

18. +1

[DailyGrind51]

13. 2

[dsc]

15. the answer is 288

division and times are equal please excuse my dear aunt shaniqua not withstanding.

[pnwmom]

16. Yeah, but why? n/t

[fried eggs]

24. It's viral because so many people are getting it wrong

[pnwmom]

27. They're getting it wrong because it's deliberately ambiguous. n/t

[NotThisTime]

45. No it isn't, use the Order of Operations?

[ReggieVeggie]

70. nm

[Snoutport]

94. nope...simple math rule I've taught to 3rd graders

you do the work in the parenthesis as a problem first.

[proud2BlibKansan]

99. How quickly our Math scholars forget that simple rule

LOL

[Hosnon]

137. Ambiguous, by definition, means no one right answer. nt

[Arugula Latte]

172. delete

[palm_to_forehead]

21. You can tell if a person learned math via please excuse my dear aunt sally or really learned it

by what they say the answer is.

PEMDAS is not a set in stone rule, it's a way for kids to remember it.

Multiplication and division are on equal in priority and when that's all there is, you go left to right.

The answer is 288.

The real problem is the bad form of the original equation.

[October]

104. And...

Doesn't the same apply (left to right) when it comes to addition/subtraction?

I came up wit 288, as well.

[palm_to_forehead]

147. yes.

But addition and subtraction are both handled after multiplication and division.

However, parentheses are handled before everything.

[October]

155. Right - following the "pemdas" acronym

Oh, and pardon my typo.


*with

[palm_to_forehead]

160. My point is...

PEDMAS should be spelled P-E-DM-AS

Because it would be just as valid to be PEMDSA. When people think it's meant to be taken literally including the DM and AS they are misled.

[October]

165. Good point!!! But I guess it would be an awkward acronym to pronounce. lol! /nt

[Dr. Strange]

22. Google says...

288

Silly Google.

[Gabi Hayes]

23. hahahaha........ PEDMAS

9+3=12

48/2=24

24x12=288!!!!

[Gabi Hayes]

31. Place Every Damn Multiple Always Second

[IndyPragmatist]

26. 288

48 / 2 * (9 + 3)

48 / 2 * 12

24 * 12

288


The first thing you do is address the parenthesis, which gives you 12.

Then you move on to multiplication and division. The parenthesis can be really be removed from the equation and replaced with a * since you have fulfilled the responsibility of the parenthesis.

Multiplication and division are treated as equals in the order of operations (as are addition and subtraction), so you move from left to right. 48/2=24, then 24*12 and you get 288.

It's meant to confuse people. The parenthesis gets first dibs, but only what is inside them. Once you have performed that operation, the parenthesis no longer exist. Its confusing because people are taught to attack the parenthesis first, but don't remember the specific rules of the parenthesis themselves. So you want to completely eliminate the parenthesis by multiplying by 2, when the parenthesis no longer exist because the equation inside them has been completed. To get 2, it should be written as 48/(2(9 + 3))

[KittyWampus]

34. wouldn't the proper way to get 2 then be 48/(2)(9+3)

I made the mistake that ended me up with 2, btw. :)

[mdmc]

48. thank you

[slackmaster]

29. Beyond the rules of precedence of operations, the official rule is to read from left to right

Division and multiplication are equal in precedence. From that perspective, the correct answer is 288.

But I don't see it that way. Because of the close proximity of the 2 to the parenthetical expression, my brain wants to do that part first then divide 48 by the result, as if it was like this:

48
____________
2(9+3)

The problem is ambiguous IMO.

[pnwmom]

30. I agree. n/t

[tkmorris]

32. I think it LOOKS ambiguous, but isn't

There are very specific rules for solving a problem of this type. If you are meticulous about following those rules there is no ambiguity.

[tridim]

35. If I wrote code like that I'd be fired

It's not technically wrong, but it sure is stupid.

[tkmorris]

37. Oh I agree. It's written poorly, but that's the intent I suppose

It's meant to confuse. A sort of mathematical illusion if you will.

[L. Coyote]

43. It is succinclty written, and proper in expression.

It is an unambiguous math statement with a definite answer. Grade school math solves it.

[tkmorris]

62. Sorry, but I don't agree

It is PROPERLY written to be sure, as it violates no rules. However, when putting an equation to paper for others to see, my objective is that it be widely understood. As such I would write it in such a way as to confuse the fewest people. I have no issue in solving it as posted; as you say it IS proper, unambiguous, and has a definite answer. Others clearly do misunderstand the equation as written. That is unfortunate but true.

Tridim suggested above writing it in the form (48/2)*(9+3) . That would serve fine, and I would wager money that fewer people would solve it incorrectly if written that way. Thus, FOR ME, and depending on purpose, it is better expressed that way. Just my opinion.

Of course if you are creating a test for math students or similar there might be value in writing it in the form in the OP, just to make the students think about it a bit more.

[Maru Kitteh]

136. It doesn't really matter if you agree or not. That's the beauty of math and rules.

The problem is presented in it's most precise and concise form. Rules apply. One answer is correct and no ambiguity exists. What that more of life were so simple.

[fishwax]

145. it's not the most precise form, though n/t

[cliffordu]

75. Yep. It does.

I likes the math because numerically, anything useful for most humans can be resolved.

Unlike politics and relatives.

[reggie the dog]

53. why do you assume multiplication where there is nothing

there is no * so how to you know that the assumed sign is not + or - or / or *?

[tridim]

55. It's a math rule.

like in E=mc^2

[krispos42]

131. So what we're seeing is math as written by a lawyer?

:D

[dionysus]

152. to the eye it reads like 48/(2*(9+3)) doesn't it?

but written in sql it's clearly 48/2*(9+3)...

[JVS]

36. Discarding the order of operations because you don't like the way it looks defeats their purpose

The problem is not ambiguous.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Duppers]

50. the problem is indeed ambiguous

Your credentials for saying it's not?

[JVS]

60. It's only ambiguous to people who don't know the order or operations.

To everyone who knows them, there is no ambiguity. That is the entire point of having such conventions.
My credentials are a degree in math with experience as a calculus grader in my senior year, perfect scores on the PSAT math and the GRE quantitative sections (both tests that like to trip up people who aren't sure about the basics), and (most relevant to this issue) having done well in Algebra 1 and having mastered the order of operations song.

Your credentials to call it ambiguous?

[cliffordu]

73. You had me at the order of operations song.....

:rofl:

[fried eggs]

90. I don't see your answer

[Duppers]

129. I posed the question to a person w/ a B.A. in math,

a M.A. in physics, and who is currently a PhD candidate in theoretical physics. He had perfect scores on his SAT too, plus he was awarded two scholarships.


His email reply to me:


"4chan has done it again. I thought this was the worst meme ever and that it wouldn't catch on, but it has.

It's a meme that's like 2 or 3 months old. It's ambiguous and meant to incite arguments over what really amounts to syntax. There are two factions here basically: do they want you to evaluate (48/2)*(9+3)=288 or 48/(2*(9+3))=2? This isn't really a math problem as it wouldn't interest even and undergrad in math and deals only with out-dated primary school-based syntax...mathematica gives 288, as would following the syntax taught in primary school...but it's still too ambiguous to most readers, so if this appeared in, say, a paper, they would specify (48/2)*(9+3).

I miss the days when better memes escaped the confines of 4chan. XD"

Love,
xxxx
(my son)


Btw, I did not reveal my take on the problem's syntax nor his father's (a PhD theoretical physicist w/100+ publications) in order to influence his reply. Hubby thinks the problem's syntax sucks too. ;)

-duppers

[Canuckistanian]

40. That's how I learned equations work

Solve from left to right. Don't jump ahead of yourself.

[Arkana]

33. It's 2.

Have to remember your order of operations.

[no limit]

39. I suck at math, and even I can figure that one out

You simply type it in to google :p

[SheilaT]

41. It's 2.

The way I understand order of operations is you do what's inside the parentheses first. Then mulitply that by the number directly outside. Then divide it into the number above the divisor sign.

To solve it any other way it's going to have to be written differently.

[Lucian]

42. Not right...

with the order of operations, you first add what's in the parenthesis, then divide 48 by 2, since you have to go left to right when both multiplication and division are present in the equation. Then you take that and times it by 12.

288 is the answer.

[lumberjack_jeff]

57. Officially.

Journal of Algebra Vol 17: "We shall sometimes use • and sometimes juxtaposition to indicate ring multiplication. When both occur, juxtaposition takes precedence, ie, xy ■ z = (xy)z."

Tamkang Journal of Mathmatics: "Multiplication is indicated both by juxtaposition and by "x". When both forms occur, juxtaposition takes precedence. So (ab x c) x de means ((ab)c)(de) ."

It's two.

[Lucian]

69. Wrong.

Order of operations:
Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction.

First, you add the parenthesis, which gives you 12. Since multiplication and division are in that problem, and since they're both level as far as operations are concerned, you then go from the left to the right.

You then take 48/2, which is 24, then you times it by what's in the parenthesis, 12.

288 is the answer.

I'm not an idiot. Don't treat me like one.

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. It's not me treating you like an idiot. It's the Journal of Algebra vol 17

talk to the hand

[proud2BlibKansan]

100. LOL!

[Renew Deal]

138. You're not an idiot, but you are wrong.

The answer is 2.

[nebenaube]

71. You are confusing real math with computer math...

sorry, but you are.

[Lucian]

78. No I'm not.

I'm looking right in my math book. I'm right.

[nebenaube]

110. Well

In first year computer science we are taught what you know because that's how the cpu does it. For the last 50 years the answer would be 2. Perhaps they have changed how they teach it to harmonize with serial processing requirements.

[surrealAmerican]

44. Too gross...

no, that's two gross.

[mwb970]

46. American kids are like #45 in math, and *this* goes viral?

It's ambiguous. So what? I'd be more interested if people addressed real math problems, not trick questions.

[lumberjack_jeff]

47. These guys get it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5XfCE_x6S4

[annabanana]

51. I have forgotten roughly 87% of any math I ever learned. .

and I had no problem with it. Have standards fallen that far since the mid-sixties?

[lumberjack_jeff]

56. It's not so easy

And I did mechanical engineering for 20 years.

Two ways of looking at it.

PEMDAS=

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

Parentheses, exponents then Left-to-right multiplication/division
48/2(9+3) =
48/2*12 =
288

2 is the right answer;
Journal of Algebra Vol 17: "We shall sometimes use • and sometimes juxtaposition to indicate ring multiplication. When both occur, juxtaposition takes precedence, ie, xy ■ z = (xy)z."

Tamkang Journal of Mathmatics: "Multiplication is indicated both by juxtaposition and by "x". When both forms occur, juxtaposition takes precedence. So (ab x c) x de means ((ab)c)(de) ."

The implied multiplication 2(9+3) goes first.

[tkmorris]

81. Interesting

I guess there is some ambiguity after all. Or perhaps NOT, if juxtaposition is widely accepted as taking precedence over "x".

[lumberjack_jeff]

83. It seems that as computers become more frequently used

that this juxtaposition rule is being phased out.

[boppers]

93. Amusing pic.

The one on the left was designed in 1992, the one on the right 1997... a mere 5 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Texas_Instruments_graphing_calculators

[fishwax]

117. lol -- nice pic :)

[themadstork]

144. Damn

Why modern calcs be fucking with my syntax? If I cram shit together that shit takes precedence!

But seriously, seeing so many people hold grade-school singsongs as the end-all/be-all of syntax convention has been pretty amusing. It can't be wrong or outdated. . . It's in a SONG!


There's ambiguity in any human endeavor. I invite those who see math as the realm where total unambiguity reigns to check out a book in philosophy of math. It's pretty fascinating stuff!

[annabanana]

108. Dear L.J.

I never heard of PEDMAS, I barely recall what exponents are and I assure you I never got past Volume 16 in The Journal of Algebra.

A juxtaposition is a literary adjacentness and "ring multiplication" sounds like the 5th Day of Christmas to me.

I guess I just don't know enough to be confused.

[lumberjack_jeff]

113. Now that I know more, I'm more confused.

Funny how that works. :hi:

PEMDAS or "please excuse my dear aunt sally" is an a acronym for the order of math operations; Parentheses, Exponents, (Multiplication or Division), (Addition or Subtraction).

[Seiteki]

171. Not really applicable =\

The problem with this rule here, is it refers to if both forms inferring multiplication appear, and in 48/2(9+3), only one does. It merely states that if the equation is such as the example xy ■ z, that the x is multiplied by the y, before the z. This rule is of no real use here.

[tridim]

58. I like this one..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U706g7_m_78&feature=related

BTW, cmd.exe errors on 48/2(9+3), missing operator. It only allows 48/2*(9+3), = 288

set /a 48/2*(9+3)

[KittyWampus]

77. that is one of the cutest things I've ever seen.

[Angry Dragon]

49. The answer is 2

you have to solve for each side of the division symbol

[immoderate]

54. You are thinking equations. There is no "each side."

The result is 288.

--imm

[Spinny Liberal]

52. Well now

don't I feel like a f*cking loser. Haha thanks.

[Earth_First]

59. Find "x"

[tridim]

61. Looks like 3C to me.

hehe

[ReggieVeggie]

87. LOL

[irisblue]

114. LOL

so loud i woke up the sleeping cat next to me....thanks

[Odin2005]

63. 288. That wasn't hard. That's 4th Grader stuff.

People, people, remember what you learned about Order of Operations! :hi:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

102. Exactly.

[elana i am]

64. 2

order of operations...
9 + 3 = 12 parentheses first
2 x 12 = 24 because multiply in proximity to parentheses comes before divide
48 / 24 = 2

[ReggieVeggie]

76. there is no precedence among operators

just left to right

48 / 2 * (12)

24 * (12)

288

[SidDithers]

88. But that's not stating the equation correctly...

it's not 48 / 2 * (12)

its 48 / 2(12)

48 / 24

2

Sid

[ReggieVeggie]

154. 2*(12) equals 2(12)

its the same thing

[ReggieVeggie]

65. yes I can

are the facebook people having a problem?

[cliffordu]

66. EASY PEASY.

[fried eggs]

67. So far, the answers are mostly... wrong

[spanone]

68. ...and the answer is

[ReggieVeggie]

72. I guess because people are getting it wrong nt

[eridani]

79. The answer is 42

And do you know what the question is? Or where your towel is?

[lumberjack_jeff]

80. it's not obvious

[krispos42]

133. !

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:




FOR THE WIN!!!

[salin]

82. in the paraenthesis first, get rid of paren next (by completing the operation indicated)

then multiplication or division then addition or subtraction.

Inside the parenthesis first (12), get rid of the parenthesis 2(12) = 24. Then regular order (mult/div) so 48/24. =2.

SAT - word problem (have to create the equation the basic problem wouldn't be written) 101.

[Lucian]

85. With the order of operations...

you don't multiply 12 by 2 first. Since there's both division and multiplication, you have to go left to right.

48/2, which gives you 24, then multiply that by 12, 288.

[salin]

101. disagree - in order of operations first deal with inside the parenthesis... then have

to get rid of the parenthesis (by performing the expressed operation to the quantity inside the parenthesis) once the parenthesis are gone - then the left to right with multiplication and division (then addition and subtraction.) I do not assert certitude with left to right (once the parenthesis are gone) vs mult and div over subtraction and addition. I always have followed the order of ops before the left to right. Not a mathematician, but use math a lot. Have always found that I get to correct answers by this method.

[elana i am]

103. maybe it's a difference between coding logic and

regular mathematics.

i learned the way you did in my logic class for web programming. start with the innermost set of parentheses and work out. then do whatever is next to the outer parentheses to finish that little section of logic and eliminate the parentheses. THEN do the rest of PEMDAS. then after that, left to right.

because it wasn't written as an equation i assumed logic.

[salin]

106. thanks for the explanation (per the difference)

will have to remember to put this challenge to a friend who is both a mathematician and a computer programmer (would better understand the problem per the programming.) I am guessing his mathematician self would win out (per 2) - but, I have primarily known him on his math side - will be a fun conversation.

[Lucian]

84. The only thing more annoying than this equation...

is the phrase "going viral."

I don't know about anyone else, but that phrase annoys me.

[ReggieVeggie]

86. internet denizens are akin to viruses

I guess :shrug:

[etherealtruth]

89. Why?

[trackfan]

91. Obviously, a correct application of logic and intelligence could come up with 2 different answers.

The "correct" answer depends on a agreeing on a LEARNED convention. There is no actual CORRECT answer, as the convention is a tweak. Anybody who claims there is a correct answer must have a low IQ, and not understand how smart people think.

[fried eggs]

96. LOL

[lumberjack_jeff]

115. LOL

[fishwax]

121. hehe

:D

[tridim]

127. The person who asked the original question is a dickweed

I assume that's why the question was posed in the first place.

An additional set of parenthesis would make the answer obvious to anyone who passed 5th grade math.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

92. i'm with the 2 crowd.

48 divided by the product of 2 x 12.

[October]

105. 288

Parenthesis solved first, then left to right

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

111. 48 / 2(9 + 3)

or

48
_______

2(9 +3)


48
_______

2(12)


48
______

24


2

[anarch]

95. No, I can't.

[ClarkUSA]

97. Easy.

288

[fishwax]

107. On edit: I vote for 8.66667

But I'm still working on the proof :rofl:

[DCBob]

109. The left to right rule is not well known and should never be assumed..

as was illustrated so well by the two calculators in one of the posts above. That is why parens should always be used in a situation like this so there no confusion or ambiguity.

[phaseolus]

119. Yes, exactly. Also, THIS IS WHY SOME PEOPLE HATE MATH.

There's a lot of stuff in mathematics that's stunningly beautiful and ... sensible. Then there's things like this rule.

It's just a convention. One look at how we can't agree on a correct answer shows that this rule's kinda dumb, doesn't it? Using parentheses is easy, it's correct, and if you want to be assured of a correct result when handing off the problem to someone else, this little stunt shows you damn well better remove the ambiguity.

This weird little rule isn't any fun. I have to believe it's one of those things that makes kids learn to hate mathematics.

[XOKCowboy]

112. 42?

It's my answer to anything. Thanks Douglas Adams.

[fishwax]

116. does 1/2x = x/2?

:kick:

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. Yes. But does 1/2(x) = 1/(2x)? n/t

[fishwax]

120. lol -- I'm of two minds on that one

:rofl:

The format of subject lines doesn't allow these things to be presented without ambiguity. :D

[krispos42]

135. Only if x=1 or x=-1

Right?


What do I win?

[salin]

122. after thinking about this - it seems that a whole lot of folks don'tl obey the distributive property

forgive me for being pedantic. But just as 2(x + 3) = 2x + 6; 2(9+3) by notation means 2*8 + 2*3
If you can explain to me how these two quantities are not eqaul - using real numbers, than the math rule of the distributive property is still intact. In which case 48/2(9+3) = 48/ the quantity of 2*9+2+3. You can't divide per order of operations - until you have distributed the defined multiplication.

[tiny elvis]

126. from a comment on youtube from a math teacher

you can't use the distributive rule because 2 is in the denominator and (9+3) is in the numerator.
You can replace divided by 2 with times 0.5 giving us 48*0.5*(9+3).
Feel free to use the distributive rule there if you want
48*(9*0.5+3*0.5) = 48*(4.5+1.5) = 48*6 = 288

[fishwax]

130. but (9+3) isn't in the numerator

unless you ignore the distributive rule.

"You can replace divided by 2 with times 0.5 giving us 48*0.5*(9+3)."

True, but that assumes you actually are dividing by 2 rather than by 2(9+3).

[dsc]

142. actually yes it is

You actually have two fractions. The first one is 48/2 and the second one is (9+3)/1 and they are being multiplied by each other.

[fishwax]

143. right, but only if you ignore the distributive factor

if you account for the distributive property in the order of operations (and this is not at all unusual, although perhaps, based on other responses in this thread, not universal), then 2(9+3) is the denominator.

[fishwax]

128. I was wondering when someone would mention the distributive property

I had thought about mentioning it earlier, but I only did so sarcastically by arguing that the answer was 8.6667.

You can get that answer by applying the distributive property and then messing up the order of operations:
48 / 2(9+3)
= 48 / 2*9 + 2*3
= 48 / 18 + 6 (since division takes precedence over addition, haha)
= 2.667 +6
= 8.667.

Anyway, I know that isn't actually that funny, but I amused myself just the same :) Then I got distracted and forgot to discuss distribution ...

[eShirl]

146. lol

it is, too, funny!

[kaiden]

124. I got a D- in 9th grade Algebra and I had a private tutor.

2 or 288 is valid to me; of course, I came up with 1,248.

[Hutzpa]

125. That makes it a landslide.

why not 300+ :shrug:

[Hosnon]

132. The lack of a space between the 2 and the ( indicates that everything but the 48 is

the denominator.

Thus, 2.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

148. indeed

[Spider Jerusalem]

139. Solve for brackets first. 48/2(9+3)=48/2(12)=24*12=288

The order of operations is standard and unambiguous. The answer is NOT two.

[csziggy]

141. I haven't been this confused since Dad got a Reverse Polish Notation calculator

And if I remember the notation for that abomination correctly, the problem would be stated:
48 2 9 3 + * ÷


With Reverse Polish Notation, the operators immediately follow the operands and are performed immediately, in order. As noted the problem would be solved thus:
48 2 9 3 + * ÷ = 48 2 12 * ÷ = 48 24 ÷ = 2


Dad had that damned Reverse Polish Notation calculator for years and I got used to using it after a while. It took me a few months to get used to a normal calculator once I could buy a calculator of my own and by then the craze for RPN had run its course. His was probably one of the HP desktop calculators introduced in the late 1960s and it was at least ten years later before I had a calculator of my own.

[jayfish]

149. IMO, the problem with this problem is that it is written incorrectly.

It should be written like this:

48
2(9+3)

[Jazzgirl]

150. 288 is the answer.

That is the first thing I came up with and I'm pretty darn sure it's correct. Math was not a strong subject for me but I ain't that dumb! }(

[dionysus]

151. that's because the spacing implies that it's 48/(2*(9+3))

as opposed to 48/2*(9+3)

[WatsonT]

153. 42!

That's always the answer.

[Auntie Bush]

156. 2... don't even pen and paper.

[flvegan]

157. Only on DU will we find Deleted subthreads in a maths thread.

"maths" in honor of the Brits today.

[lumberjack_jeff]

158. We're about rules. Math is about rules

Fuck with the rules at your own peril. :hi:

[DevonRex]

159. 288. End of discussion. Nt

[lonestarnot]

161. So if two isn't the answer what is it and why?

[dipsydoodle]

162. It is two

Don't fret.

[lonestarnot]

163. :)

[MindPilot]

164. 2. Because addition does not clear parentheses

Simplify the expression: 48 ÷ 2(9+3)

48 ÷ 2(12) still have a parenthetical operation to perform

48 ÷ 24 NOW the left-to-right sequence can be applied.

[josephleon]

166. The answer is "profits."

I can obfuscate this further.

The answer is “profits” or something synonymous.

The problem is that everyone focuses on the math but ignores the avatar preceding it – “War is a racket.”

War is a racket is the title of a book/pamphlet by a U.S. Marine Major General named Smedley Butler, who, at the time he died in 1940, was the most decorated man in Marine Corps history including two medals of honor…His contention in the book is summed up in the opening: "War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

The math problem, if presented to a computer, would have the result 288…I can see the “2” argument, but the order of operations arguments are what computers follow, and while the 9+3 in parentheses gets done first, the mathematical problem that remains after you perform the addition first is all division and multiplication; so you just perform it left to right – 48 / 2 * 12.

But what is the significance of 288 in conjunction with the avatar? Well, 288 to anyone who deals in sales is two gross (2 times 144).

So, the complete problem looking at both the words and the math reduces to the pun: War is a racket to gross…

And according to Smedley Butler, the last word would probably be profits.

[Azathoth]

167. It is ambiguously written

Algorithmically it evaluates to 288. However, the lack of an explicit multiplication operator makes it somewhat ambiguous. What, for instance does, 48 / 2a evaluate to? Is it 24/a or 24a?

[kick-ass-bob]

168. It's a VIRUS?

Then I'm not solving it. x(

End of thread.

[Bunny]

169. Christ, I'm a complete Math Nitwit, and I got 288.

48 divided by 2 = 24
9+3 = 12
24 x 12 = 288.

I was taught math by nuns in the mid-60s. I have NO idea if my methodology is correct, I'm just amazed I got the correct answer.

[Arugula Latte]

173. You're supposed to do what's in parenthesis first.

2 is the answer, sez I.

But, what do I know. I was an English major. :P

[GreenPartyVoter]

170. Three votes for "2" from our household. Me, my husband (who was a teacher,) and our

7th grader math whiz.

[Name removed]

174. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[David__77]

175. As an economist, I say "2."

I would treat 2(9+3) as one term. Now, if it was 48 / 2 * (9+3) then the answer would be 288. I have no idea what is the formal rule, but I strongly suspect that my colleagues would agree with me.

[Name removed]

176. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.