Babylon Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 How many people actually come across equations like this in day to day life? I haven't in the last 16 years, so my brain has decided this information is pointless and filed it in the bin. In fact, if I took a GCSE maths paper now I'd probably be lucky to scrape a C if I had to show my working out.
Matty_89 Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 48÷2(9+3) = ? 9+3=12 48/2=24 24x12=288 The formula would look like this is the answer was 2 .... (48÷2)/(9+3) = ? I'd echo whats been said before in that that's a terribly expressed equation. I'd go with 2 if I were pushed to give one answer. I agree that (9+3) = (12), in which case you'd still have to address that calculation first. 48/2(12) = 48/24 = 2 It's loose logic, but the question is looser still. I also agree with the guy that said if you were to get that in an exam, and there was no correction offered, give both answers and challenge your mark if they mark you down. It's possibly the kind of thing they might give at a Uni interview to see how you think. I can kinda see your logic, but I'm fairly certain that you'd do the division before you multiplied together....bodmas and all that.
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 Haven't read the rest of the thread but surely you need to work out the total of the bracketed figures first which I thought would be 2 x (9+3) = 24 then you have the number to divide into 48 which = 2
The Don Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 you surely have to work the brackets out 1st. This would include the 2 on the outside of the bracket. which would be 48 / 2(12) = 2 Can you also not write the equation as 48 ----------- 2(9+3) which would also give 2. to make 288 it would have to be written as (48/2)(9+3)
The Don Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 substitute the 9 for an X and the 3 for a Y and you get this. 48/2(X+Y) you would have to seperate the brackets out 1st 48/ 2X +2Y can now be written as 48/ 18 + 6 So theretically using BIDMAS 2.67 + 6 = 8.67
Alexikokopops Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 How many people actually come across equations like this in day to day life? I haven't in the last 16 years, so my brain has decided this information is pointless and filed it in the bin. In fact, if I took a GCSE maths paper now I'd probably be lucky to scrape a C if I had to show my working out. I haven't come across an equation like this in the 9 years since I did GCSE, but that's only because it seems to have web written by a literal idiot. I use correctly written algebra most days
Bert Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 I haven't come across an equation like this in the 9 years since I did GCSE, but that's only because it seems to have web written by a literal idiot. I use correctly written algebra most days Just a shame you can't use full stops properly....
Father Ted Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 DEFINITELY 288. First do the brackets, so you get 48/2x12 It goes in order so its then 24 x 12 = 288
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 DEFINITELY 288. First do the brackets, so you get 48/2x12 It goes in order so its then 24 x 12 = 288 If that were the case then surely the equation would be 48 / 2 x (9-3)
James. Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 There's no definitely about it. The notation is completely retarded and renders this entire debate absolutely pointless.
lcfc"weasel" Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 It's impossible to give an answer 100% but the most sense solution is 2, I stand by what I said that when you sum 9 and 3 you can't just remove the brackets, that is 90% certain I think.
StanSP Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 If that were the case then surely the equation would be 48 / 2 x (9-3) If there's brackets in the equation, then a multiplication sign is not needed. You automatically multiply the part in brackets.
danny. Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 How many people actually come across equations like this in day to day life? I haven't in the last 16 years, so my brain has decided this information is pointless and filed it in the bin. In fact, if I took a GCSE maths paper now I'd probably be lucky to scrape a C if I had to show my working out. I unfortunately do (for work), although I would def. check in this case if the 48/2 should have brackets or not as it's a bit vague
DB11 Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 I asked my maths teacher: "Who cares? If you can't write an equation in a proper format you don't deserve a proper answer."
AoWW Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 I asked my maths teacher: "Who cares? If you can't write an equation in a proper format you don't deserve a proper answer." This.
Alexikokopops Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 Just a shame you can't use full stops properly.... I'm a numbers man There's no definitely about it. The notation is completely retarded and renders this entire debate absolutely pointless. Exactly. If someone came to me at work with something like this, I'd slap them in a furious rage. I asked my maths teacher: "Who cares? If you can't write an equation in a proper format you don't deserve a proper answer." I like your maths teacher.
lcfcadam Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 Voted for 2 and then realised that it is 100%, completely and utterly ambiguous. Both answers are correct and wrong at the same time. Better off just writing your equation in a unisignificant (made-up word) fashion...
Houdini Logic Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 Is is a valid equation? Being that there's no symbol between the 2 and open bracket, I'd say that it either wasn't valid or it should be (48 divided by) 2 to the power of 12.
Alexikokopops Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 Is is a valid equation? Being that there's no symbol between the 2 and open bracket, I'd say that it either wasn't valid or it should be (48 divided by) 2 to the power of 12. It's a stupid question, and one that has made me surprisingly furious. I'm almost as angry as when people get statistics wrong. One at a time ladies, one at a time...
Guest ttfn Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 There's no brackets around 2 x (9+3), therefore 288. If it was presented as: 48/(2(9+3)) it would be 2. It's not, so it's 288. Somebody said there's no definitely about it. There definitely is. It's 288.
The Doctor Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 Is is a valid equation? Being that there's no symbol between the 2 and open bracket, I'd say that it either wasn't valid or it should be (48 divided by) 2 to the power of 12. no it shouldn't, for there to be any x to the power 12 in there it would have to be written as 48÷2(9+3)
Houdini Logic Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 no it shouldn't, for there to be any x to the power 12 in there it would have to be written as 48÷2(9+3) I've decided it's not valid
lcfc"weasel" Posted 11 April 2011 Posted 11 April 2011 There's no brackets around 2 x (9+3), therefore 288. If it was presented as: 48/(2(9+3)) it would be 2. It's not, so it's 288. Somebody said there's no definitely about it. There definitely is. It's 288. The fact that you think there's a definite answer proves that you know next to nothing about maths.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.