It's deliberately confusing.

Really should be another pair or brackets indicating whether the (9+3) is on the top or the bottom of the equation. However, yes, when it's written out like this going left to right is the correct approach.

In any case, this problem is not clear enough in terms of what's going with what, even with BIDMAS, PEMDAS, GEMA (what the [bleep] is this). It's not clearly defined how to do this problem correctly. It's still 288 unless brackets/more parentheses say otherwise.

GEMA is:

 

Grouping

Exponents

Multiplication and division

Addition and subtraction

 

Ah. Never heard of that.

This is a 7th grade Pre-Algebra problem.....psh.

It doesn't even matter whether you use PEMDAS, BIDMAS, GAMA, PETA, or whatever, it's all the same thing.

 

There's enough information to solve the problem. It may not be in the correct usage/form, but "How are you?" and "h0w r u?" both are understandable.

Got 288 using BODMAS, pretty easy stuff.

is this thread serious? did your professor laugh when you asked him this question?

^No, but I laughed when you couldn't read the first post.

I really don't see how anyone who has passed basic algebra doesn't get 288...

It doesn't even matter whether you use PEMDAS, BIDMAS, GAMA, PETA, or whatever, it's all the same thing.

 

There's enough information to solve the problem. It may not be in the correct usage/form, but "How are you?" and "h0w r u?" both are understandable.

 

Mathematics is strictly a logical system of numbers and symbols, there is a right and a wrong way of doing it. If it's ambiguous, it's wrong. Written/spoken languages only use a logical system as a guideline, you are allowed to use creative and ambiguous derivatives to get across subtleties. They are not the same.

 

There needs to be another bracket to clarify, or the question needs to be fully displayed to show where the (9+3) lies relative to the division line. It's not too much to ask for.

It's clear enough without it if you follow the rules.

 

You do whatever function is in parentheses first, and then do the problem from left to right with the answer you got in the parentheses.

 

We don't write 1x^1, it's just understood that whenever you see x as a variable, it's that way.

 

As such, we write 48/2(9+3) because it should be understood that it's operated like (48/2)(9+3).

Still, my general rule is to use excessive brackets when typing out equations.

 

Either way - typing math sucks :razz:

I love maths. It and science.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

If you were expected to do 48/(2(9+2)) then they'd specify that way.

 

Why would you give somebody 442+567 and then tell them they're wrong when they don't come up with 2.

[spoiler=Solution]PEMDAS

 

48/2 * (9+3)

=24(9+3)

 

Distributive property...

 

= 216 + 72

= 288

 

Aah yeah, I voted 2, but after reading, of course its 288. :mellow: I think if it had been shown like this:

 

48/2*(9+3)

 

instead of with the division symbol (which doesn't seem to exist on my keyboard :P) more people would get that answer.

[spoiler=Solution]PEMDAS

 

48/2 * (9+3)

=24(9+3)

 

Distributive property...

 

= 216 + 72

= 288

 

 

You can't use the distributive property if you use Pemdas...the first letter of Pemdas is Parenthesis, which would make it

 

48/2*12...

 

Same answer, just pointing that out.

At least I didn't come up with 2.

 

48/1 x 1/2 (9+3)

 

48/1 x 1/2 (12)

 

48/1 x 1/24

 

48/24

 

2

 

Poorly written question tbh with a degree of ambiguity on whether the parenthesis are attached to the two or are a whole number.

 

1/2(12) would still be six as the 1/2 is outside the parenthesis, indicating that it would just be 1/2 × 12 = 6. In your equation, it would be multiplying the 2 and 12 together first, which wouldn't be going left to right.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math.

 

Questions can be ambiguous. Answers and the maths within can't be ambiguous and still be correct, even if the answer is that the question is ambiguous. The mistake here is with the syntax, not the maths itself. We're not destroying the fabric of causality here, we're just saying that the asker should have typed in a goddamn bracket.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math.

 

Questions can be ambiguous. Answers and the maths within can't be ambiguous and still be correct, even if the answer is that the question is ambiguous. The mistake here is with the syntax, not the maths itself. We're not destroying the fabric of causality here, we're just saying that the asker should have typed in a goddamn bracket.

I still don't see how this question is even remotely ambiguous. There's a reason why PEMDAS/BIDMAS/whatever exists. I don't know how your experience with math went, but I've always been given expressions with the least possible amount of brackets possible.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math.

 

Questions can be ambiguous. Answers and the maths within can't be ambiguous and still be correct, even if the answer is that the question is ambiguous. The mistake here is with the syntax, not the maths itself. We're not destroying the fabric of causality here, we're just saying that the asker should have typed in a goddamn bracket.

I still don't see how this question is even remotely ambiguous. There's a reason why PEMDAS/BIDMAS/whatever exists. I don't know how your experience with math went, but I've always been given expressions with the least possible amount of brackets possible.

 

 

There is a confusion about whether just the 2 is multiplied by the (9+3), or if the whole 48/2 fraction is multiplied by the (9+3). Division and Multiplication occupy the same 'priority', so it's ambiguous even if BIDMAS gets involved. You wouldn't get this problem if it was fully displayed.

 

The best approach with text equations is 'When in doubt, put brackets in to clarify'. You're not going to get any prizes for efficient text equation writing when it causes this amount of confusion.

I see now how the question is somewhat ambiguous, and it's open to interpretation. Saying that, it is kind of impossible to answer seeing as they don't specify whether they want you to do 48/(2(9+3)) or (48/2)(9+3)... I'd still go with 288 though, seems more logical with BIDMAS.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math.

 

Questions can be ambiguous. Answers and the maths within can't be ambiguous and still be correct, even if the answer is that the question is ambiguous. The mistake here is with the syntax, not the maths itself. We're not destroying the fabric of causality here, we're just saying that the asker should have typed in a goddamn bracket.

I still don't see how this question is even remotely ambiguous. There's a reason why PEMDAS/BIDMAS/whatever exists. I don't know how your experience with math went, but I've always been given expressions with the least possible amount of brackets possible.

 

 

There is a confusion about whether just the 2 is multiplied by the (9+3), or if the whole 48/2 fraction is multiplied by the (9+3). Division and Multiplication occupy the same 'priority', so it's ambiguous even if BIDMAS gets involved. You wouldn't get this problem if it was fully displayed.

 

The best approach with text equations is 'When in doubt, put brackets in to clarify'. You're not going to get any prizes for efficient text equation writing when it causes this amount of confusion.

When they're in the same priority you work it out from left to right.

Actually, yeah, you're right about the left-to-right thing, I partially retract that statement. You will get a consistent answer (which is of course 288) if you throw it into a good calculator like Wolfram Alpha, but many humans don't approach questions the same way. A question of BIDMAS only seems to pop up when the whoever's asking the question is being intentionally sloppy and a little big annoying.

 

 

Blah, I should stop caring about these kinds of things.