are you guys smart enough for this???

>>739804812
2

>>739804812
How could anyone fail that? It's simple as fuck

File: 1495972805097.jpg (22KB, 399x322px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 399x322px

>>739804900

>>739804812
9 ez

>>739804812
I was a math tutor
PEMDAS
so 1

>>739804923
what's your answer? a bunch of people on plebbook are pretty divided (heh) at what the correct answer is

>>739804812
9.

(6/2) x (1+2)
3 3

>>739804812
The correct answer is John Cena

>>739804900
>>739804952
>>739804999
wrong

>>739804974
correct

>>739804812
no, I am not a genius

The answer is 9. A lot of retards are going to say it's 1 but it's actually 9.
You do the (1+2) first and then it becomes 6÷2(3) which is the same shit as 6÷2×3 and then you go from left to right which equals 9

>>739804812
1

>>739804812

2995636249364629

>>739804812
1

>>739804812
NA math

>>739805060
PEMDAS you fucking retard

It's 1.
Too many retards here

>>739805060

wrong, you forgot the distributive law, the answer is 1

>>739805124
The M and D are interchangeable as is the A and S so it's technically also PEDMAS or PEDMSA

>>739805052
My nigga

>>739804974
Show your work

>>739805124
Bait. P E (md) (as)
Same priority operations are read left to right

>>739805060
I had heard they made some kind of change in the "rule" sometime after most of us were already taught to do it the right way (like you did)

>>739804812
6/2(1+2)
6/2*(1+2)
6/2*3
3*3
9

the fact that we have to argue about something like this is just sad. and the answer, for all of you retards, is 17.

Shit like this starts wars.

>>739805124
The way they taught it when i was in school, the answer is 9

>>739805244
This, it can be written as
P
E
DM or MD
AS or SA

This is due to multiplication and devision being the same thing mathmatically, same for AS

File: Screenshot_20170723-074006.png (376KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 720x1280px

Is the scientific calculator right or wrong?

>>739805377
It's still 9

>>739805408
wrong, it is calculating left to right without taking into account the distributive law

>>739805308
Fuck you, I was a math tutor

>>739805408
that's MS paint, not a calculator

File: Untitled.png (20KB, 1152x648px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 1152x648px

>>739805308
not the guy you replied to, but

>>739805124

BODMAS you fucking spic

Brackets, Order, Division, Multiplication, Addition, Subtraction.

Fucking NA education

>>739805124
Calling someone retarded when you have the wrong answer is retarded.

BENIS
9

>>739804999
Checked

>>739804952
>>739804999
>>739805322
wrong wrong wrong

multiplication comes before division

6 / 2 (1+2)
6 / 2 * (1+2)
6 / 2 * 2
6 / 4 = 1.5

answer is 1.5

>>739804812
Its 1

>>739804812
6/2(1+2)
6/2(3)
3(3)
9

>>739804974
If you were a math tutor you would have shown each step in solving the problem. So, if it is true you are a math tutor, you're a pretty shitty one.

>>739805499
same shit you idiot, just a different naming convention.

Multiplication and DIvision are the same thing so they are carried out left to right.

ALTHOUGH, due to the distributive law, the answer is 1

t. an eurofag

How are people do retarded we need some sort of ethnic cleansing of the Autists it's 1 if you say otherwise you need to be executed .

>>739805573
you're more wrong than anyone here lol

>>739805573
>(1+2)
>2

cough

>>739805408
One of the worst fakes i've ever seen

Maths postgrad here. Obelus should not be used in any mathematical equation, that said, if it was meant to be a division, it applies same priority as division symbol and multiplication symbol(and or multiplication factor).
Please stop these threads.

>>739804999
Triple 9 confirms it is 9.

>>739805637
Fuck you and learn your shit you shitty student
My job isn't doing your homework

>>739804974
No wonder you WAS a math tutor...
It's 9

>>739805641
>Multiplication and DIvision are the same thing

Now I know you're a fucking moron.

And no, it's not 1. If you follow the fucking formula instead of pulling numbers out your fat ass, you do the brackets first which is 3, then the division, then the multiplication.

It's not hard desu :^)

>>739805363
that's only the answer for retards, indeed.

>>739805754
It's 1 dumbass, that's why you were NEVER a math tutor

>>739805573
No it doesn't, troll. Multiplication and division have the same priority, except for reading left to right. The order of which gets executed first is determined by which one comes first when reading the problem left to right.

>>739805676
this

If you think the answer is anything but 1 it means that a) you are not educated enough to be worth employing, and b) your brain function is fundamentally flawed, and the act of you passing down your genes actively devolves the human race

File: 7.png (8KB, 568x487px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 568x487px

the answer is

Depending on the "order of operations" you choose to use, the answers will be different.
There is a rule that explains what method is used for what. However it is highly debated when to use which.

>>739805167
This is correct, distributive law mean 2(1+2) = (2*1 + 2*2)

>>739805844
if this is bait I salute you

if it isnt, kill yourself

>>739805494
It's wrong, sorry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URcUvFIUIhQ

>>73980575
BSc in Mathematics here
No the guy you quoted is actually right multiplication is the same as division 6/2 = 6x0.5 in the same way subtraction is just the addiction of negative numbers.
Fag

We should use "riddles" like this one to find and kill ignorant people

File: 1500605763035.gif (128KB, 728x426px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 728x426px

6÷2(1+2)=
=6÷2•3=
=6÷6= _1_=what a bunch of fags u are

>>739805844
>>739805573
>(1+2) = ?
It's worrying that people can't even do simple additions nowadays.

>>739805878
This is entirely incorrect, just because there are different anagrams used in various areas to teach the order of operations doesn't change how maths works

File: just educate yourself bitchez.jpg (50KB, 699x687px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 699x687px

>>739804812
>>739805494

>>739805807
It's 9 retard. God why are all americans so stupid

>>739805844
correct

>>739804812
In some countries the division symbol is the equivalent of a « - ». Meaning there are two correct answers as you did not clarify a divided symbol.

>>739805739
You are a stupid cunt. If you want to teach, you show the proper steps. If you want the student to prove they know how to solve the problem, you must get them to write out the proper steps. Quit your trolling, faggot. You're better at sucking dick than math. Actually, you're better at sucking dick than trolling also.

>>739804812
its 9 you fuck heads

How people get anything other than 1 makes me lose faith in americas education system

File: Screenshot_20170723-075138.png (71KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1440x2560px

You guys are retard use a fucking calculator

>>739805827
It actually depends on when you were taught to solve this. The order of operations changed about 15 years ago. I have no idea why. Some Fucking liberal no doubt.

>>739806004
You did (6/2)*(1+2), moron

File: vdw13b51bs9z.jpg (14KB, 434x308px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 434x308px

>>739805979
2(1+2)
2x1 + 2x2
2 + 4

off yourself

>>739804812
It's a poorly written expression. the 6/2 or the 2(1+2) should be surrounded by parentheses to make the author's intent more clear.

1 ez

>>739806102
thats how its done fuck wit

>>739806004
>needed a website to solve it
>still got it wrong

You are all fully retarded. Let the STEM PhD solve it for you:

6/2(1+2)
6/2(0.5)
12(0.5)
6

The answer is six, amerifats.

>>739806005
I'm Mexican American Bitch
that's why I can be a math tutor

>>739806103
Even if they did it your way they still got it wrong, mate.

>Multiplication and DIvision are the same thing

They are you spastic. Division is literally multiplication by the reciprocal.

Within the foundation of mathematics, there is no formal definition of division that is separate from multiplication in a way that addition and multiplication are different

>>739805844
nice one

>>739804812
thats equivalent to (6/2) * (1+2) = 9
if it was 6/(2*(2+1)) it would be 1

>>739804974
I have a question...

I was taught BEDMAS in school, but I was also told if multiplication comes before division it becomes BEMDAS, and vice versa for if subtraction comes before addition. Is this correct? That always confused the fuck out of me so I hope it's not true

>>739805827
>being wrong
>belittling the intelligence of everyone else
Pompous cunt. Wallow in your ignorance like a pig in shit.

>>739806102
You can exactly what I did

https://www.wolframalpha.com/
check yourself

If fact it can mean(6/2)(1+2) and that does not change anything

Unless you do it like this 6/[2(1+2)] the answer will be 9

It's gotta be 9.
6/2(1+2)
P (1+2) = 3
6/2(3)
(MD) left to right 6/2 = 3
3(3) = 9
the numbers here have the same priority so it just goes from left to right.
Think about it when you add and subtract you are working with these numbers by themselves singular units, thus they are in the same priority when trying to reach an answer. Division and Multiplication are the same way instead of working with singular numbers you are working with groups of numbers. This is how I was taught. I'm not sure if the rule has been changed but I've always been seen it like this.

>>739806206
Same here man, that's what I did and got 9 lol

>>739805988
Yes it does. If you solve it using a different order, you get different answers.

>>739806206
I got no clue dude, ask a math major or a math teacher

_a math tutor

>>739806168
bait

File: thatshowfractionworks.png (17KB, 836x412px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 836x412px

Fukcing retards, you should learn how fraction works

In all honesty I wonder how much of this is bait

I'd say 70:30 (bait:retards) ratio

File: 1461785158792.jpg (80KB, 766x960px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 766x960px

>>739804812
Oh look, it's this thread again. Thank you for reminding me why I left this shithole in the first place. You're all fucking retarded.

File: 1_Wolframs_answer.png (47KB, 805x680px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 805x680px

>>739804812

6 ÷ 2 ( 1+2 ) = 6/2 × ( 1+2 ) = 3 × 3 = 9 ;

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=evaluate+6%C3%B72(1%2B2)

>>739806374
correct

>>739806206
It's B E (DM) (AS)

Division and multiplication have the same priority. You do them from left to right. Same when it comes to addition and subtraction.

>>739806374
>>739805494
retarded wannabe math tutor

File: 1EJUlqy.jpg (37KB, 460x460px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 460x460px

>>739806080
>How people get anything other than 1
If you use PEDMAS, the expression is arbitrary, because multiplication and division are "tied" for precedence, and PEDMAS doesn't say shit about left-to-right vs right-to-left.
Most (but not all) computer programing languages use left-to-right as a tiebreaker, but that's not a "pure math" convention.
If you insist on using left-to-right, you get 6/2*3 = 9.
If you insist on using right-to-left, you get 6/2*3 = 1.
But let's not stop there! Let's make up more arbitrary rules!
From now on "6" is just an upside-down "9", so (with left-to-right) it's upside-down 9 divided by 2 (upside-down 4.5) plus 3, so the answer is "upside-down 7.5",

>>739806206
It's so very simple.
Multiplication and division have the same priority, which is higher than addition and subraction which also share the same priority.
For this problem,
Do the work in parentheses first.
Then, reading from left to right determines what you do next.
6/2(1+2)
=6/2(3)
=3(3)
=9

>>739805494
NA math kek, why are NA retards so fucking stupid i dont get it

File: 16602685_10208826391159319_4686815097623917756_n.jpg (25KB, 442x442px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 442x442px

Proof by algebra:

let x= 6,
a = 2
b = 1
c = 2
answer = ?


written as x ÷ a(b+c) = ?

from distributive law a(b+c) = (ab+cd)

x ÷ (ab+cd) = ?

subbing in

6 ÷ ((1*2)+(2*2)) = ?
? = 1

>>739806500
>>739806686

Thank you both. Although I was hoping to prove my old teachers wrong

All of you fuckers are entirely incorrect. My entire family and I have graduated at the top of our classes at the most prestigious universities in the country. Now let me solve this pre-school infant level shit of a mathematics problem for you brain dead pieces of autistic shits.

We have the problem: 6÷2(1+2)

At first glance you retarded, ignorant fucks assume it's such an easy question that you ignore the rules of PEMDAS. I know many of you have no idea what that is so let me spell it out for you.
Penis
Ejaculation
Masturbate
Dicks
Asshole
Sperm

This is how my teachers and professors have gotten me to remember PEMDAS over the years of my education and that being said, the answer is 42

It doesn't matter which way you all are taught. The answer is 1. The law of distribution is an important one.

>>739806781
isn't it past your bedtime?

6/2(1+2) = x
6/2(3) = x What people don't understand at this part is you don't do 2x3 as the 2 isn't inside parentheses, don't believe me use a calculator that allows you to input a full equation before answering

File: giphy.gif (1MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x300px

>>739806656

File: pemdas.png (32KB, 885x655px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 885x655px

>>739804812
1. case closed.

>>739806754
>Proof by algebra

>>739806631
Most computer programing languages use "left to right" rule as a tie breaker because THAT'S HOW THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPERS LEARNED MATH IN SCHOOL. Left to right!
Is this whole thing another example of everything getting redefined, like genders and racism definitions? Or is this another example of the US having to be different from the rest of the planet the same we they are about metric and date format?

>>739806080
>thinks 4chan is American
>can't use possessive apostrophe
I lost faith after reading your post, retard.

>>739807030
The problem isn't even the same one you faggot.

ITT: Idiots who seem to forget that the distributive law exists

File: weak bait kid, notthin perssonel.jpg (88KB, 679x1162px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 679x1162px

>>739807030

>>739806686
Yeah that's the way I was taught. But I had heard this method was changed and was no longer being taught in schools...anyone else remember "new math"

>>739805167
Brackets are evaluated first, so it becomes 6 / 2(3).

>>739806097
It's got to be some dumbing down of the math to make it easier to teach to retards, so my bet is you are correct, because that sounds like a liberal thing to do.

>>739807338
Not when there is a "special case"

a(b+c) = (ab+ac)

Just as a question to those who think that the answer is 9, what formal math education above highschool have you got?

File: XWvoyYJ.jpg (29KB, 480x446px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x446px

>>739807043
>THAT'S HOW THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPERS LEARNED MATH IN SCHOOL. Left to right!
Nope.
Left-to-right is NOT a pure math convention.
Some (but not all) programming languages use it.
What about the languages that go right-to-left?
Were they created by dyslexic programmers?
Nah, unlike pure math, a computer can't solve different arts of the equation simultaneously, it's forced to evaluate different operators sequentially.
And it's just easier to evaluate an otherwise arbitrary expression in one direction or the other than detecting the ambiguity, and throwing an error.

But ultimately, you should know I'm right about it being ambiguous, because otherwise you wouldn't get people arguing in these threads.

>>739806656
bait

You people know there is some troll right now jizzing in his pants while watching you argue, right?

>>739807407
I agree, liberal dumbing down. Because there was no logical reason to change it

>>739807415
that's not a special case you monkey, you're just using distributive property of multiplication

File: WhatAreYouFuckingRetardedOrSomething.jpg (30KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x600px

>>739806004
>>739804900
>>739804952
>>739804999
>>739805060
>>739805322
>>739805573
>>739805626
>>739805724
>>739806091
>>739806293
>>739806410

>>739805844
>nice bait

>>739806293
You multiple what you solved inside the parentheses by the number directly to the right before any other action is taken, unless the parentheses has an exponent outside of the right parentheses. Exponents inside are used to solve the parenthesesto begin with. MTH098 forever faggot bitches!

>>739805060
I heard that retards sometimes think they are not retards

>>739807468
From what you are saying, you no doubt were born after the change in the way things were taught according to some posts here. It goes to show you sre just as ignorant as people who did not get a memo after graduating that some genius decided to change the rules. So, yes, the world did exist before you were born, and people did think and do things differently. That doesn't make them any more wrong than you can be.

>>739807688
This is correct

Think about how you integrate using the chain rule, you treat the scalar of the parenthesis and the exponent as a single term for the output equation.

For fuck's sake, the answer is 6

Its like a major Mandella Effect with the order of operations being different depending on your original time line.

really need to leave this thread, stupid americans spaming 1 are hurting my brain, you guys do all the same mistake, just check this >>739806374
, and now go shame

>>739805818
Only smart person here

It's
P>E>MD>AS meaning mult. And division are equal as subtraction and addition are. It's read left to right

>>739807783
This argument is completely invalid. Say they just changed the order of operations, I'm willing to bet a lot of historical math theorems and problems will just cease to work.

They changed how they explained and teached the concept, but not how it actually works

>>739804812
When evaluating a mathematical problem, prioritize the operations in the following way first by position on the list. In the case of ambiguity, such as addition/subtraction (which have equal priority) and multiplication/division (which have equal priority) without specifying parentheses, evaluate left to right in the appropriate step.
1) P
2) E
3) M D
4) A S

So...
A) 6 / 2 (1 + 2) =
B) 6 / 2 * 3 =
C) 3 * 3 =
D) 9

It's 9.

File: Schermata 2017-07-23 alle 14.25.08.png (82KB, 1150x807px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1150x807px

>>739808020
wrong screenshot

>>739806097
>>739807783
>>739807324
>>739807407
You are all retarded. The order of operations hasn't changed since it was formalised a few hundred years ago.

Retarded highschool teachers taught it wrong for a long period, teaching students that multiplication comes before division. This was later clarified, and today it is clearly taught that multiplication and division have the same priority. This isn't a change in the rules, it's just reinforcing how things already were, which retarded teachers had misunderstood.

If you are talking about another change in the order of operations, give details and evidence. Otherwise you are talking crap.

Even more importantly, what you're arguing about has NOTHING to do with the order of operations. The people who come up with 1 as the answer are applying the law of distribution. Which is a separate thing.

Fucking hell, the retards have taken over.

File: fractionforretards.png (11KB, 611x481px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 611x481px

If you guys really insist to solve it with a fraction, then do it at least right, retarded american shit.
So happy to be an educated german instead of a piece of shit like you

>>739805494
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URcUvFIUIhQ

The correct answer is 9 The top line of your solution should read 6/(2(1+2)) then the answer would be 1. It has some missing brackets.

The evaluation rule says evaluate everything INSIDE the brackets first. This is where the confusion lies.

PhD in Pure Maths / Statistics here.

retards claiming that it's anything but 1 please watch this video. It explains how during the Parenthesis part of PEDMAS or whatever you wanna call it you need to distribute. This occurs before multiplication or division.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TucCode5pTE

>>739804812
is the answer you are a boring cunt who posts shit ? im sure its your a boring cunt who posts shit

>>739807958
They didn't change the order of operations. They changed the way it was taught because fags like you couldn't understand the fact that two sections of an ordered list (MD and AS) have equal priority.

>>739808267
It's 9 :)

>>739804812
>"Viral"
Jesus christ, summer.

>>739808165
and that being said, which you're right btw. If everything had changed as much as they seem to want it to, then that means damn near every coding language is doing "bad math". If you type that equation into any scripting language, you're gonna come out with 9, because it follows PEMDAS correctly without this distribution bullshit.

>>739808281
You must be the school retarded guy

>>739808263
thanks, finally

>>739804812
omfg. this has to be the shitiest meme ever.
its 9.

>>739808165
You give a nice response outside of the insult at the end. Because it makes ZERO sense why anyone would change the rules like that.
But even a long time ago, I learned the order of operations correctly, with the priority and left to right rule.
But where does this distribution thing come in? Who is teaching that?

>>739808165
Changes are made all the time
https://www.d2dhub.org/s/6thGradeMathStandardsChanges.pdf

http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.order.operations.html

according to this website, the answer is 9

http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/04/q-how-do-you-calculate-6212-or-48293-whats-the-deal-with-this-orders-of-operation-business/comment-page-2/


>it's 9 fags

>>739804812
This is a stupid question that would be trivial if ambiguity was not introduced by poor notation.

oh its another one of those
>i cant write a math expression with correct syntax so theres two """correct""" answers
threads.
its 9 or 1 depending

OK people who think that the answer is 9, I would like you to explain the flaw in my reasoning without calling me a retard.

say we had this expression, a ÷ b(x+y) = ?

In my understanding, it is safe to treat a bracket as a single term

so we can set (x+y) = c

so we have a ÷ bc = ?

It is my understanding that writing this as a fraction would yield a/(bc) (A on BC)

Now, using this logic with the OP problem:

6 ÷ 2(1+2) = ?

let (1+2) = x

so 6 ÷ 2x = ?
Now, in what world would anyone take that equation and simplify it like this: (6/2)*x = ?

The correct way to write the equation would be 6/(2x)

thus the answer is 1

>>739807682

Maybe you should try to find an impartial, automated, system that ACTUALLY applies the defined rules of mathematics, as specified by professional mathematicians THEN try to back up what you are incorrrectly asserting.

Sure, YOU definitely ARE correct in asserting that:

a(b+c) = (ab) + (ac) ,

..... BUT that is not the original problem as asked by the OP, which was specifically:

6 ÷ 2 (1+2) ;

..... and whether you write it THAT way, OR whether you write it as:

6÷2×(1+2) .

In either case, you MUST divide the six by the two BEFORE you multiply by the 3 (that is given by the 1+2 in the braces);

..... HENCE YOU MUST DISTRIBUTE 3(1+2) to get: 3(1+2) = (3×1) + (3×2) = 3 + 6 = 9

Sorry if you REALLY can't get to grips with the FACTS of INTERNATIONALLY DEFINED and accepted rules of mathematics, but real professional mathematicians have been doing it reliably and consistently for a very long time.

Of course, if you are an American, the rest of the world already knows that you are fucked-in-the-head, and the remining seven billion members of the mathematical community here on planet Earth are happy to ignore you, just like we do with your democratically elected brain-dead President.

No offence intended.

>>739804812
It's weekend kill yourself

Search this PDF for " order of operations" you will see that they are still making the changes that you insist haven't been made in a hundred years.
https://www.d2dhub.org/s/6thGradeMathStandardsChanges.pdf

Anyone who says the answer is 1 should look at this:

https://youtu.be/dAgfnK528RA

File: images-93.jpg (8KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 225x225px

Bump

>>739808820
>But where does this distribution thing come in?
It's an algebraic technique. If the expression contained variables, then it would be useful. Let's say it was 6/2(1+X). The brackets have priority, but we can't resolve them fully without knowing the value of . But we can simplify the expression by distributing the 2, so we get (2x1) and (2X).

Applying it to OP's expression, where there are no variables, is kinda pointless, but it's not incorrect. It's one way of solving the brackets.
But in distributing the 2, we actually completed the multiplication before the division. That's the reason we end up with different answers.

In terms of school maths or computer maths, the correct answer is 9, because you would always just apply PEMDAS, solve the brackets in a straightforward way, then go left to right.

But in pure maths terms, there isn't one correct answer. In fact, it's a flawed or ambiguous expression.

Math is for autists.

math is for alpha males

>>739810094
>ambiguous expression
But this is the exact point of the order of operations - to make a standard method of solving the problem to remove any ambiguity.

PROOF THAT THE ANSWER IS 1

Using a similar expression, 6 / 2(2+4) = ?, and assuming that it is to be interpreted from left to right, it can be written as:

(6/2)(2+4) = ?, as seen here>>739805322 as an example

simplifying this, we get the answer to be 18

Now, we will look at the expression and take into account the distribution law

6 / 2(2+4) = ?

6 / 4 + 8 = ?
= 9.5

Now these answers are obviosly different.

Now trying the approach were 6 / 2(2+4) = ? is written as 6/(2(2+4) = ? (fraction)

Without distribution:
6/(2*6) = 0.5

With distribution
2(2+4) = 4+ 8
6/(4+8) = 0.5

as the answer is the same for the latter two examples, we can assume that the maths is correct.

Apply these same steps to the OP, and we get the answer to be 1. The only reason why it can be confused is because in the way of working out that the answer is 9, the bottom term is always 2, becase 2*1 = 2 and 2 = 2

>>739809965
That is an excellent vid. Hopfully it will put this argument to rest.

>>739810284
oops, that line "6 / 2(2+4) = ?" is meant to have 18 as the answer below it

>>739808874
This document is just a list of 6th grade teaching standards and criteria. So, yes, the way mathematics is taught and assessed changes. (All the changes in this document seem to just be minor tweaks to the wording of the rubric.)

What does this prove? This isn't remotely the same as the idea that liberals invented a new system of mathematics in the last few decades, which is what the /pol/ tards seem to be suggesting.

File: image.jpg (16KB, 300x259px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x259px

>>739809269
Hear hear!

>>739807682
For it to be 1 you'd have to have your equation written as 6/(2*(1+2)).
But since we have expression 6/2*(1+2) its equivalent to (6/2)*(3/1), in other words 9.

>>739810279
Yes, and that's great for teaching mathematics to schoolkids and for programming a computer. But it's essentially just simplifying for convenience.

Applying the law of distribution doesn't go against the order of operations, because you are still solving the brackets first, then doing the multiplication, and finally the addition.

What that shows us is that any expression containing multiplication and division is liable to be ambiguous.

Have some shit I found in google:
>In 1892 in Mental Arithmetic, M. A. Bailey advises avoiding expressions
containing both ÷ and ×.
>In A History of Mathematical Notations (1928-1929) Florian Cajori writes (vol. 1,
page 274), "If an arithmetical or algebraical term contains ÷ and ×, there is at
present no agreement as to which sign shall be used first."

Introducing the order of operations, as a formal education and programming rule, gives a workaround to this problem. But it doesn't take away the actual mathematical ambiguity.

Sollution https://youtu.be/C-SsMQMFq8c

>>739810440
https://youtu.be/dAgfnK528RA
This will make things very clear as to why there are so many different answers.
https://youtu.be/dAgfnK528RA

>>739804812
1 single pemdas

>>739810896
No anon. That video explains why there should be one correct answer. This doesn't help at all.

The ambiguity comes from the fact that solving the brackets may already involve doing the multiplication, if we apply the law of distribution.

>>739810819
In this case, the problem is so simple it's a joke.
In school, problems like these are taught in lower levels before algebra is introduced, so there doesn't seem to be a need to use algebraic solutions for this problem. Yes, I understand it is hard to argue why it should not be allowed to be solved with algebraic solutions, but, in algebra class, you are not presented with simple problems like what we have in this thread to solve. So, for this reason, I think order of operations is the best approach.
> any expression containing multiplication and division is liable to be ambiguous.
We do not get to choose the problems that present themselves, so ambiguity is a neccessary evil, and this is why a standard has been created to remove it. Just my two cents.

>>739811005
You are not understanding the rule.

>>739804974
you were a pretty bad one then, because division and multiplication have the same operator precedence.

the answer is 9

6/2*(1+2) = 6/2*3=3*3=9

enter the expression into google or somewhere cucks

>>739804812
9. Now shut the fuck up. Using pedmas or bodmas both produce 9. PD in both are equal in order of operation, so in linear form its whichever comes first.
6 / 2 * (1+2)
6 / 2 * 3
3 * 3
9

>>739809269
Holy shit this is some sick ass bait. Saved.

>>739804812
let x = 6 / 2*(1+2)
2x(1+2) = 6
2x(3) = 6
6x = 6
x = 1

>>739805167
>>739805447
>distributive law
Oh, I fucking how love how you guys are patting yourself on the back and lording it over the plebs. But you got it fucking wrong.

Here's what the solution looks like when you apply distributive law correctly:
6/2(1+2)
6/2(1)+6/2(2)
3x1+3x2
3+6
9

The answer is still fucking 9.

Why would you distribute only the multiplication, and not distribute the whole first part of the expression?

Anyone who says 1 is a know-it-all idiot who made a rookie mistake.

>>739812084
kek

File: baby spiders!.webm (1MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x404px

>>739812084
>let x = 6 / 2*(1+2)
>2x(1+2) = 6
>2x(3) = 6
>6x = 6
>x = 1
let x = 6 ÷ 2×(1+2)
2×(1+2) = 6
2×(3) = 6
6 = 6
1 = 1
x = x
x = x ÷ 0
x = sex

Dumbfuck

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/03/facebook_math_problem_why_pemdas_doesn_t_always_give_a_clear_answer.html

>>739812084
Why are you changing everything around? It is a simple problem, it does not require such work to solve!

>>739812084
your second line is incorrect
x = 6/2*(1+2)
2/(1+3)x = 6
(2/3)*x = 6
x = 9

pleb

>>739811276
(One correct answer.) I thought that was the point to this thread?

>>739812460
>>739812346
let x = 6 / 2*(1+2)
times both sides by 2*(1+2)
2*(1+2)*x = 6
simplify
2*3*x = 6
6*x = 6
x = 1, therefore 6 / 2*(1+2) = 1

>>739812090
Preach

>>739804812
BODMAS
Brackets first: 2+1=3
No orders
Division: 6/2 = 3
Multiplication: 3x3=9
Answer == 9

6/2(1+2)
6/2x3
3x3
9

>>739809268
>In my understanding, it is safe to treat a bracket as a single term

THIIISSSS - definitely what I have been taught as well; yes a(y) = A x Y BUT it's a single value and not adherent to your retarded order.

Poorupe BTFONTR

>>739812516
Who knows the point of anything anon? But that dude said the video explained why we get multiple answers. It doesn't. The video implies that we should all agree.

>>739812586
x = 6 / 2*(1+2)

>times both sides by 2*(1+2)

2*(1+2)*x = 6*(1+2)^2

still nine.
2*3*9 = 6*(3^2)

>>739804812
You always solve each term first.

6 is 6

The other side starts with resolving the operation in the parenthesis

1+2=3

Then, 2 should multiply that 3; so "6"

Lastly you resolve 6/6

Your answer is: 1

File: 1496859129905.jpg (85KB, 992x558px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 992x558px

>>739812658
I concour. Why is this still being distuted?

>>739804812
Yeah. It's 9.

How about this:

{(-2)6/2*+1, 1/(2)2*+-6, 6(2*+-1/2), -+1/6*(2)2}

>>739812832
a/b * c/d = ac/bd
[6/2*(1+2)] *[2*(1+2)/1] = 6*(2(1+2))/2(1+2)
both 2(1+2) cancel each other out, therefore [6/2*(1+2)] *[2*(1+2)/1] = 6

>>739804812
I got 9 and I have a PhD in Mathematics.

>>739812814
Well it explains that if we all use the same rules we would all get the same answer. But since there are no rules anymore then its a cluster fuck or nonsense instead of order.

>>739812999
let me just note that I concur with the notion that the answer is 9, but I want to find where I went wrong in my workings

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-23 at 3.50.28 PM.png (138KB, 1636x1094px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1636x1094px

>>739812999
>[6/2*(1+2)] *[2*(1+2)/1] = 6*(2(1+2))/2(1+2)

top kek, burger education

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-23 at 3.51.38 PM.png (141KB, 1342x412px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1342x412px

>>739813134

>>739809268
>>739812691
The 'problem' is that you're allowing the implies multiplication (the 2 before the bracket) to take priority over the division, even though the division comes first in a left-to-right reading.

That is, by making 2(1+2) into a single value, you gave the multiplication priority over division.

There are some mathematicians who agree with you, and would see implied multiplication taking priority. But this goes against the convention of PEMDAS, so you would fail a basic highschool exam.

File: whatt.png (3KB, 348x88px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 348x88px

>>739813145
>>739813209
you have missed out the bracket in (2(2+1))

>>739804979
Its 9, any one who says otherwise seriously needs to retake elementary math. PEMDAS.

>>739804812
You think I fucking come on here to do math?

>>739807716
1/10 b8

>>739813286
there's no bracket there in the original problem.

the original expression is 6/2*(1+2)

>>739812848
But what is your logic for doing 2x3 before doing the division?

Rules of operation
-inside parenthesis first 6/2*3
-multiplication next 6/6
-division 1
answer is 1

>>739813386
you see, the computer reads it as (6/2) * (1+2) instead of 6/2(1+2)

>>739804812
Half the skill in a good math problem is the set up, it must be clear and easily understandable, communication is key. I don't see these as a competition for the right answer when whoever set this up is retarded. I don't even see any point in solving these honestly it's a waste of my time.

File: 1500690300561.jpg (153KB, 666x1386px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 666x1386px

This is going in circles now...getting dizzy..

>>739804812
This is just a poorly written problem.anyone who writes whit out like this clearly doesn't do math often. 9 you stupid fucks 6 / 2 * (1+2). separate it out you faggot troll.

>Hurr durr if I write it out like a retard I can tell others they dont know math. go back to facebook

>>739813777
self trip check

>>739813777
This and check

>>739813441
>computer reads it as

nope: https://ideone.com/eUZDpg

>>739814028
>https://ideone.com/eUZDpg

>>739813280
Actually, resolving the 2(1+2) portion first is the correct way to implement PEMDAS. The correct answer is actually 1.

6÷2(1+2)

Resolve parenthesis

6÷2 (3)

Parenthesis is still not technically resolved.

6÷

1
Another way to do it is with distributive property to make sure you are fully resolving everything related to the parenthesis in one big go.

6÷2(1+2)

6÷[2 (1)+2 (2)2]

6÷[2+4]

6÷[6]

1
Fuck. You could even turn it into a fraction to simplify everything before and after the division sign into single number
6
-----------
2 (1+2)

6
--------
2 (3)


6
-
6
1

fucking retards it's 9. the M and D in PEMDAS are interchangeable (as are the A and S) so out of those you do whatever is more left in the equation first.

>>739814099
>PEMDAS

well meanwhile, in non common-core land, outside of the US and in the history of mathematics both division and multiplication have the same order of precedence.

File: whattt.png (14KB, 668x385px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 668x385px

>>739814028
It seems like you didn't read my post.

6 6
---------- = ----------
2(1+2) (2(1+2))

>>739804812
Omfg

6/2(1+2)
6/2(3)
6/6
1

>>739814099
that's not what it means to solve parenthesis. it means solve what's inside. after that, it's just 3, which you MULTIPLY so can be written as 2 x 3. lol some people

>>739814187
because you put too many parenthesis you fucking idiot

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-23 at 4.11.09 PM.png (51KB, 1280x524px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1280x524px

>>739814187
you're wrong, the answer is obviously 6

>>739814099
>Parenthesis is still not technically resolved.
Yes, the parenthesis has been resolved to three. Resolving the parenthesis first means simplifying what is INSIDE the parenthesis. It doesn't mean the multiplication then takes priority just because it effect the parenthesis. The division effects the parenthesis as well, by that shitty logic.

You are treating the problem like a fraction, where 6 is one value, and everything on the other side of the division symbol needs solving before the division happens.

That's not PEMDAS, it's retardation.

>>739814126
But only if you follow the rules. Many here pay no attention to rules of any kind. Tend to follow their own rules. That's why no one can agree on a 5th grade math problem. And why we're Fucking doomed

File: whatttt.png (794B, 124x69px) Image search: [Google]

794B, 124x69px

>>739814187
>>739814293

>>739814180
They have the same priority in PEMDAS as well. That dude is just retarded because he's treating the problem as if it's a fraction. And he seems to think that solving the brackets means completing an operation that is outside the brackets.

>>739814213
retard

>>739814213
>hurr I did the multiplication before the division for no reason durr

Faggots fighting aside this helped me understand pemdas a bit better

everyone in here is wrong
it's

6/2(1+2)
identical with
(6)/(2(1+2))
then
(6)/(2*1+2*2)
(6)/(2+4)
(6)/(6)
1

>>739814180
Correct.

I'm not arguing against that. I'm arguing for the fact the parenthesis takes precedence over both of the other two.

That parenthesis isn't fully resolved at 2(3)

The only way to resolve it completely is to multiply the two in and then go back for that other 6

>>739814459
I thought that's what he was doing. Just couldn't bring myself to believe such stupidity could be real.

>>739813437
NO! Multiplication and division have the same priority, executed from left to right! You take that fucking pemdas too literally.

so many fucking retards answering 9.

visualise this
6
___________
2(2+1)

solve each side of division line then kill yourself because you`ll never amount to anything

>>739814644
wrong you fucking idiot. where the fuck did this left to right idiocy come from

>>739814520
It should be executed from left to right. That's the rule and the reason.

>>739805447
Distributive law does not apply here.

How is b that stupid, its 1 common sense algebra

>>739814832
You can apply it if you want. The answer is still 9. See here:
>>739812090

>>739805942
I'm addicted to negative numbers too.

>>739814832
wtf are you talking about, distribute law always applies in maths (hence why it's called a law).

6/2*(1+2) = 6/2*1 + 6/2*2 = 3+6 = 9

Holy shit this thread is still going.

>>739805573
Trollfag.

>>739815023
Aha, well, let me rephrase and say "distributive law applied incorrectly does not apply here"

>>739804974
Then you must be a pretty shit math tutor, answer is 9.

6div(2)(3)

by pemdas you are supposed to start from left and go to right in multiplication and division

(3)(3)

9

>>739814569
>6/2(1+2)
>identical with (6)/(2(1+2))
But those two are not identical. What is this retardation? You are introducing a new set of parentheses so you can treat the problem as a fraction, but it isn't a fraction. Note that it is an obelus (÷) in OP's image.

>>739814736
It is the rule. Always has been.

>>739804812
It's not PEMDAS, It is
>P
>E
>M/D
>A/S
answer is nine
Proof:
The fucking calculator.

>>739814736
thats the actual rule dumbass

>>739812586

>let x = 6 / 2*(1+2)
.....[assign x to OP's given expression] ;

⇒ (2*(1+2))*x = (6/2*(1+2))*(2*(1+2)) ;
⇒ (2*3)*x = (3*(3))*(2*(1+2)) ;
⇒ 6x = 9*(2*3) ;
⇒ 6x = 54 ;
⇒ x = 54/6 = 9 ;
⇒ x = 9

..... as agreed by approximately seven billion people outside of the jolly old brain-dead United States of America.

>>739814459

No nigger, when a problem is written that way it's literally saying "6 divided by all this other bullshit on the right." That's why there's fucking parentheses on the right side at all. Which can only be completed by doing everything on that side first. Otherwise there's still parenthesis around the single 3. If they wanted the 6÷2 resolved first then it would have been separated somehow. But it's not. 2(3) takes priority over 6÷2 because there's a goddamn parentheses

1

I read 2(1+2) as a function

so you dont "convert" it into 2*(1+2) and do conventional pemdas or whatever bullshit you are taught.

6/2(1+2) = 6/6 = 1

>>739815427
thats not right you fucking retard holy shit

>>739815231
Your phone's calculator isn't programmed to do these kinds of operations. Use a scientific calculator and see what happens. Cuck

>>739815520
why not? several math teachers have agreed with me. the problem itself is ambiguous, though.

Not that it matters, because /b/ is full of fucking idiots, but the division symbol ÷ is a single representation of the NUMERATOR OVER DENOMINATOR process.

This means that 6 ÷ 2(1+2) is quite literally:

6
―
2(1+2)

or, for those who aren't retarded

6/6

with that said, please continue your retarded bitching. And remember kids, option:sage

>>739814683
With your visualization, you are changing
6/2 * (1+2)
To
6/(2*(1+2)) which is a different problem.
So because of this , 6/2(1+2) = 9
While
6/(2*(1+2)) = 1, which explains why we are seeing this debate.

>>739815168
Pemdas = guidlines, not so much a law or rule to be followed 100% of the time. Just when you feel like it

>>739815369
wrong
an exponent does not become a multiplier, it is an exponent, they are different mathematical operators.

>hurr durr I'm trolling I'm just pretending to be retarded.
you are actually retarded

>>739815744
6
_
2(1+2)
Equals 6/(2(1+2), which is not the same problem as presented.

>>739815388
>it's literally saying "6 divided by all this other bullshit on the right."
No, it fucking isn't. A division symbol doesn't divide any mathematics expression into two halves, and allow you to complete all the operations on one side first. A division symbol is not the same as a fraction line.

>parentheses on the right side at all can only be completed by doing everything on that side first
This doesn't even begin to make sense. A division operation doesn't create left and right sides. It's all one problem/expression. Even aside from that, parentheses don't mean that everything surrounding them needs to be resolved first. That's fucking ridiculous.

>2(3) takes priority over 6÷2 because there's a goddamn parentheses
No, that is not how it works. Parentheses take priority, so you solve what is INSIDE the parenthesis. That gives you 3. Once you get to 3, you've solved the parenthesis. You don't then complete multiplication before the division for no reason.

>there's still parenthesis around the single 3
No there fucking isn't. Once you've resolved it to 3, the parenthesis is gone. Why would you still have parenthesis around a single number. You don't need to resolve the single number any further, numbskull.

>>739814752
ye but he did it from right to left, as you can see

>>739815758
Visualize the actual Fucking equation! Not what you think it feels like!!

>>739806754
God damn nigger, are you even from earth?

>>739815899
Narrow minded troll, go fuck yourself.

>>739815978
>hurrr change every expression/problem into a fraction so you can get the incorrect answer durrrrr

Its 9 fucking trolls and retards

>>739815758
this is not a debate, this is idiots not knowing that the division symbol is "numerator over denominator" and also thinking that exponents means "multiplied by".
Division means everything after the / is the denominator, everything before is the numerator (that's cold hard fact, fuckwit), and exponents are not a multiplication so you don't throw in a * because your teacher had to teach you "just treat it like multiplication" in the special math class in 3rd grade because you were dumber than the rest of the kids.

Mathmatical equations are not subjective. They are as stated. Solve them in their presented state. Changing them in your mind is a learning disorder.

>>739815978
When you write it as 6 over the rest, you are effectively putting everything after the 6 in parentheses, which means you are then changing the structure of the problem before you begin to solve it. This is why you get one instead of the correct 9.

>>739815942
>no, it fucking isn't
yes it is, numerator over denominator, denominator is everything to the right.

Parenthesis and exponents take priority, you solve inside AND outside before anything else, basic formulae.

>>739816066
No need to be salty just because your education stops at "division for babies."

the answer is ~0.26

6/2(1+2)=6/23=0.26

File: helping hitler.jpg (52KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1280x720px

6 / 2(1+2)
6 / 2(3)
3 (3)
= 9

>>739804812
It's 1
6 / 2(3)
Brackets first
6 / 6
1

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evaluate+6%C3%B72(1%2B2)

>>739816098
Simplify fractions to solve. Creating fractions is not moving you towards the solution. Its simply going the wrong way.

>>739816648
How the fuck you get 3 (3) where did the 6 ? You have to multiply the brackets first. Math doesn't always go from left to right.

>>739816660
>>739816660
>6 / 2(3)
>Brackets first
>6 / 6
You already did the brackets first. You resolved them to three. Why did you then do 2*3 before 6/2 for no reason?

>>739816738
>http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evaluate+6%C3%B72(1%2B2)

Google themselves admit that the reason this turns up as 9 rather than 1 is because their calculator is dumb and uses "standard precedence"

This can be read as "simple math for people who have difficulty with actual math."

>>739816856
>You have to multiply the brackets first
Nope. You resolve what is INSIDE the brackets first. Then you go from left to right with division/multiplication operations.

>>739816879
Because the exponent is a part of the brackets, durr.

File: 1475179217864.jpg (41KB, 325x358px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 325x358px

>>739816660
This I think..

>>739804812

Obviously 1. 6 : 2*3 = 6 : 6 =1.

>>739816314
My results would be the same without using the asterisk to mean multiplication. We all know 2(x) means 2 times x. That's not what is in contention here.
What is in contention is HOW to solve the problem.
The problem should be solved using order of operations. You don't think it should be solved using order of operations, which is why your answer is different. Your way does not follow the left to right rule of execution, which is an incorrect use of the order of operations, and therefore, wrong.

Somewhere around 1-10

>>739816856
>Math doesn't always go from left to right

yes it literally always does, unless you have brackets or multiplication/division over addition/subtraction.

by your logic

4/2*6/2*3 is 2 or some shit

>>739816954

https://socratic.org/questions/how-do-you-simplify-6-2-1-2-using-pemdas

>>739817010
>an operation outside the brackets
>is a part of the brackets
no

>>739816980
wrong, you do inside, and outside, exponents come before division and multiplication and math is not a "left to right" process. Idiots get taught this in preschool when they have difficulty understanding proper logical orders of operations. "lets just tell them to do it like you read words."

Ask any asian that can do math (and is a resident of asia), they'll tell you it's 1 because they don't read left to right and don't need babysteps in their math.