Simple Maths

mathS

  On 4/10/2011 at 11:11 AM, goDel said:

the only association that counts regarding the brackets is the stuff that's inside the brackets. because almost the entire discussion is about this point i'd like to see sources saying otherwise. as far as i know, there's no special rule for distributive properties. if there is, please point to a source that says that distributive properties should be calculated before normal multiplications/divisions.

 

or keep on trolling. that's fine too.

 

*has another ruff sunday morning*

what about these cases then: 39:7(x+y) Isn't the rule to multiply 7 with x, 7 with y, add them up, then have 39 divided?

no, that's: 39/7x + 39/7y

again, show me the rule that says otherwise.

edit: or to avoid any confusion, that's (39/7)x + (39/7)y

MATH!

rename thread to simple mathseseseseseses

no srsly do it

its my thread i demand it.

  On 4/10/2011 at 11:33 AM, goDel said:

no, that's: 39/7x + 39/7y

 

again, show me the rule that says otherwise.

 

edit: or to avoid any confusion, that's (39/7)x + (39/7)y

Ok, I'm out. I had no other source besides my and my gf's knowledge of grade school math. I still believe it might be a difference in teachings though.

3^39:7(3+2)

3^(39:7)(3+2)

':' is the ratio symbol, and it seems its priority is between parenthesis and exponents.

  On 4/10/2011 at 11:29 AM, gaarg said:

what about these cases then: 39:7(x+y) Isn't the rule to multiply 7 with x, 7 with y, add them up, then have 39 divided?

That's only if you don't know the value of x and y and are simplifying rather than solving.

  On 4/10/2011 at 4:25 AM, kaini said:

how is there a two-page thread about this in fifty posts per page view

 

you do the shit in brackets first

 

they teach you this in primary school

This.

For fuck sake lads.

  On 4/10/2011 at 7:34 PM, chassis said:

  On 4/10/2011 at 4:25 AM, kaini said:

how is there a two-page thread about this in fifty posts per page view

 

you do the shit in brackets first

 

they teach you this in primary school

 

This.

 

For fuck sake lads.

it's 500 posts in on another site i'm on and the argument is now about whether or not the problem is ambiguous or not

what the shit? why exactly would be the multiplication take precedence over the division? just because it's closer to the parentheses??

the problem is not ambiguous.

Fucking BODMAS people

  On 4/10/2011 at 7:56 PM, kokoon said:

what the shit? why exactly would be the multiplication take precedence over the division? just because it's closer to the parentheses??

 

the problem is not ambiguous.

the obelus throws people off pretty harshly, i just asked a friend of mine who is in his last year studying for a maths degree and he immediately said 2, then was like "oh, no wait." a few minutes later.

it's definitely ambiguous.

it's written to confuse.

also people who aren't so good at maths and don't give a shit (i.e. me) see it and think "please excuse my dear aunt sally" not remembering that multiplication and division are actually done at the same time, left to right. just go with the mnemonic maaan.

so yes. the answer is most definitely 288, but that does not mean it's not ambiguous.

there are no variables

the answer is 288

this equation, anthropomorphized:

there are no variables

the answer is 2

P.S. that BODMAS mnemonic device they use to teach you math over the pond is fucking RETARDED. makes sense why most of you yanks don't really get basic 3rd maths principles.

BTW, this "ambigous" "stumper" is identical to one of many many many many many many trick questions that come up in 8th grade high-school repartition exams in Europe, and the point of said trick questions is to check if you can handle slightly more sophisticated order-of-operations queries that aren't covered by a fucking poem with pandas or some shit.

LOL fucking LOOOOOOOOL.

i don't usually have any sort of "Americans are stupid" preconceptions but DAAAAAAAMMNNNNN.

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:11 PM, Lube Saibot said:

 

 

i don't usually have any sort of "Americans are stupid" preconceptions but DAAAAAAAMMNNNNN.

not saying i can really say either way as i can barely count to 10

but

i can read

and that little "country" thing on the side of posts

is kind of all over the place when it comes to answers.

also in the states it's PEMDAS, at least where i grew up.

chassis is irish. i'm sure he would not appreciate being lumped in with americans.

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:11 PM, Lube Saibot said:

there are no variables

 

the answer is 2

 

 

P.S. that BODMAS mnemonic device they use to teach you math over the pond is fucking RETARDED. makes sense why most of you yanks don't really get basic 3rd maths principles.

 

BTW, this "ambigous" "stumper" is identical to one of many many many many many many trick questions that come up in 8th grade high-school repartition exams in Europe, and the point of said trick questions is to check if you can handle slightly more sophisticated order-of-operations queries that aren't covered by a fucking poem with pandas or some shit.

 

LOL fucking LOOOOOOOOL.

 

i don't usually have any sort of "Americans are stupid" preconceptions but DAAAAAAAMMNNNNN.

err... could you please explain why in this case the multiplication should be evaluated before the division?

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:02 PM, luke viia said:

there are no variables

 

the answer is 288

 

Assuming youre not trolling. Is that in reply to my 48/xy? I only suggested that so you could see the relation, but I guess ive wasted 2 posts now.

calm down lube

what's 2(6)?

now what's 1/2(6)?

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:18 PM, Dirty Protest said:

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:02 PM, luke viia said:

there are no variables

 

the answer is 288

 

 

Assuming youre not trolling. Is that in reply to my 48/xy? I only suggested that so you could see the relation, but I guess ive wasted 2 posts now.

nah i'm not trolling, and i see the point you're trying to make.

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:21 PM, luke viia said:

calm down lube

 

what's 2(6)?

 

now what's 1/2(6)?

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

answer: a) 12. b) 3.

 

 

You cant really answer this if its written like that.

Is that 6 below or above the line?

read it from left to right.

I dont know what it is, this is why word has an equation editor

  On 4/10/2011 at 7:25 PM, Babar said:

3^39:7(3+2)

3^(39:7)(3+2)

 

':' is the ratio symbol, and it seems its priority is between parenthesis and exponents.

 

i was wrong. now that i think about it again : it has the lowest priority, it's what is calculated last.

I was trying to imagine how a parser would look like and I naturally imagined it the top-down way : in this case, ':', is what you try to find first (then +,- *,/) while '(…)' is the last kind of symbol you process. Once you've stumbled upon a parenthesis couple, you explore the subtree it represents looking for ':' then +,- then *,/.

But it's all the same if you're doing it the bottom-up way : parenthesis represents complex variables, and you have to process them independantly.

The other important rule being that operators with the same priority level are processed recursively, like

1*2*3*4 = ((((1)*2)*3)*4)

if you're unsure you can still follow this other rule:

always put an operator's left and right variables between parenthesis, then put the whole var[operator]var segment between parenthesis (while respecting the operators priority order).

( (48)÷(2) ) * ( (9) + (3) )

  On 4/10/2011 at 8:11 PM, Lube Saibot said:

there are no variables

 

the answer is 2

 

 

P.S. that BODMAS mnemonic device they use to teach you math over the pond is fucking RETARDED. makes sense why most of you yanks don't really get basic 3rd maths principles.

 

BTW, this "ambigous" "stumper" is identical to one of many many many many many many trick questions that come up in 8th grade high-school repartition exams in Europe, and the point of said trick questions is to check if you can handle slightly more sophisticated order-of-operations queries that aren't covered by a fucking poem with pandas or some shit.

the answer is pretty clearly 288 if written in the silly way as the original formula.

division and multiplication have equal weighting,and are ranked over addition and subtraction (which also have equal weighting) they are performed in order from left to right.

So while yes you do the operation within the parentheses first, the rest of the formula should be done division first then multiplication.

So 48/2(9+3) (so parentheses operator comes first) --> 48/2(12) (then go left to right, so divide 48 by 2) --->24(12) (then multiply 24 by 12)---->288

Now if it were written with proper notation like 48/(2(9+3)) then yes it would equal 2.