48 ÷ 2 (9+3) = ???
- Thread starter Masked
- Start date
Kakashi3005
Newbie
- Apr 29, 2009
- 18
- 3
that would mean 4 / 2 x 3 = 0,667
this sums it up
"
Implied Multiplication
However, the answer 2 could be justified by the principle of implied multiplication. For example, consider the problem "2/5x."
If one strictly follows the standard order of operations, the correct interpretation would be "(2/5)*(x)."
But many calculators and textbooks state that a higher value of precedence should be placed on implied multiplication than on explicit multiplication:
Because "5x" is implied to be "5*x," it gets higher priority than "2/5." In this case, "2/5x" would be interpreted as "(2)/(5*x)."
Returning to the original problem, if one utilizes the principles of implied multiplication, then "2(9+3)" gets higher precedence than the explicit "48/2," and would be solved like this:
"
"
Implied Multiplication
However, the answer 2 could be justified by the principle of implied multiplication. For example, consider the problem "2/5x."
If one strictly follows the standard order of operations, the correct interpretation would be "(2/5)*(x)."
But many calculators and textbooks state that a higher value of precedence should be placed on implied multiplication than on explicit multiplication:
Because "5x" is implied to be "5*x," it gets higher priority than "2/5." In this case, "2/5x" would be interpreted as "(2)/(5*x)."
Returning to the original problem, if one utilizes the principles of implied multiplication, then "2(9+3)" gets higher precedence than the explicit "48/2," and would be solved like this:
"
- Apr 25, 2011
- 19,849
- 28,315
Yea I agree and now I think about it, when I was at school I remember doing equations like 3x + 2x and when the multiple sign is emitted, it was always taught as being a singular equation in it's own right.
So 2 / 3x would be 2 / (3xX) rather than 2/3 x X
However in the link posted near the top where i think you took that explanation from, it also stated that that explanation is not a widely agreed one!!
Anyway, what came first, chicken or the egg?
So 2 / 3x would be 2 / (3xX) rather than 2/3 x X
However in the link posted near the top where i think you took that explanation from, it also stated that that explanation is not a widely agreed one!!
Anyway, what came first, chicken or the egg?
How on earth this could be a question. From where are you guys - Dark India(sorry no insult intended). This is simple math. Some people's place isn't in this forum, but in class.
Take a look at example 3.
Code:
http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/order_operations.html
- Apr 25, 2011
- 19,849
- 28,315
If this question has spread around the popular forums - and I think it has, I wonder if you could chart the collective intelligence of the major forums by how long (in posts) the discussions last before a majority decision is reached??
