What is it /sci/

-1/12

>>8472598
That expression is at a superposition. Please collapse the wavefunction by adding the missing parenthesis in either place.

the conjecture is false.

>>8472676
How the fuck did you end up with that

File: tfwtoint.jpg (7KB, 250x217px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x217px

>>8472598
>tfw too intelligent to answer

>>8472598
1/2

>>8472598
yes

>>8472598
e^i(pi) Sqrt(-1/12)

Obviously.

>>8472598
It's fuck yourself math isn't suppose to be ambiguous.
>>8472699
That joke went straight over your head I guess.

Tell us which order you would rather we do the operations in

[math]-3/7[math]pi1/6[math]=13/85

Answer is 6/2(1+2)

>>8472598
6÷2(1+2)=6/2×3=6/6=1

>>8472598
3(1+2)
3+6
9

>>8472598
You're missing a pair of parentheses.

>>8472598


PEMDAS
E
M
D
A
S


1

It's 9. Now that I finally know how PEDMSA works, I can get these problems right.

6/2*3
3*3
9

>>8472598
1

>>8472598
You're missing a pair of parentheses, thus the problem in question can be interpreted in two ways.

1) (6/2)(1+2), in which case the result is 9.
2) 6/(2(1+2)), in which case the result is 1.

Thank you for visiting, feel free to go back to >>>/b/ .

>>8474278
You don't need another parenthesis. Once you solve what's within the parenthesis, you start solving from left to right since 2(3) is a multiplication operation so with that in mind, the problem basically becomes 6÷2*3.

>>8474282
Honestly, I am pretty glad that we use fractions nowadays in order to display the problem.

[math]\fraq{6}{2} \cdot (1+2)[/math]

As for me, the way it is written in OP's post, I would tend to read it like this:

[math]\fraq{6}{2(1+2)}[/math]

>>8474309
uhhhhhhh, I meant

[math]\frac{6}{2} \cdot (1+2)[/math]

respectively,

[math]\frac{6}{2(1+2)}[/math]