# 48÷2(9+3) = ???

Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by Agave_Blue, Apr 9, 2011.

## 48÷2(9+3) = ???

190 vote(s)
67.4%

92 vote(s)
32.6%
1. ### piece of ashFriend of Leo's

Posts:
3,287
Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
Location:
Sugar Land, TX
Our group at work had a boss for a very short time. One of the members eventually named him "BIG-STUPID-DRINK-GUY".

Now... he was big guy... he was stupid... he was always walking around with 88 ounce bed-wetter full of diet snarf. At the same time... the drink was big... and being 88 ounces of diet... it was stupid.

So... was it a big guy with a stupid drink?

Or a big stupid guy with a drink?

Or a stupid guy with a big drink?

etc...

The big stupid drink guy needed to hit the road... so does the equation.

2. ### getbentTelefiedSilver Supporter

Posts:
38,953
Joined:
Mar 2, 2006
Location:
San Benito County, California
he was YOUR boss. At some level, you consented to that cat being at least partially responsible for your livelihood.

boilerup2004, thanks for the post... don't be disappointed if you are scoffed at... it is the internet after all!

3. ### oramac7891Friend of Leo's

Age:
40
Posts:
3,276
Joined:
Sep 10, 2009
Location:
Texas
It is 2 , in math theory, the 2(12)...already solved the brackets ....is the same as 24, this I'd done before the divide sign as the whole part od that is viewed as 1 number

4. ### boilerup2004TDPRI Member

Posts:
83
Joined:
Mar 6, 2010
Location:
Indiana
getbent--thanks for the advance consolation, but lately my mantra has been "love it or shove it", so I'm not too worried about it. Somehow, I'm guessing that someone known as "getbent" already appreciates this.

...the "stupid" boss, and this "stupid" equation, probably demonstrate just how relative stupidity is. I already know that most people who think that the answer is "2" will likely not think about this deeply enough to appreciate my explanation, but at least a few others will push some buttons on their calculator and say, "whoa...that's wierd!"

I was just happy that I'm not the only person on here that has used FORTRAN, C, or even R. I just thought that since there are as many TI-30's in the world as there are cockroaches, that I might reach more people by making an appeal that way!

Back to unwinding from the gig--I should've stayed with the rest of the band and drank bourbon all night--there's too much math here!

5. ### blue metalflakeDoctor of Teleocity

Age:
66
Posts:
11,211
Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
Location:
ireland
My daughter & I both get 2

6. ### piece of ashFriend of Leo's

Posts:
3,287
Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
Location:
Sugar Land, TX
Big stupid drink guy actually threatened our livelyhood... why he earned the title... and why he was let go. The only consent was showing up to work and doing our jobs correctly despite his wishes to the contrary.

The point is... the equation is ambiguous (as was the term "big stupid drink guy")... and as such, is really just gibberish.

7. ### getbentTelefiedSilver Supporter

Posts:
38,953
Joined:
Mar 2, 2006
Location:
San Benito County, California
The only language i ever truly loved was Forth.

The others were just things to corral.

poa, thanks for the clarification, I feel better knowing that (not kidding)...

8. ### megafiddleFormer Member

Posts:
610
Joined:
Feb 27, 2011
Location:
VA
I can see everyones point of view in this matter. They are all correct in the
way they have evaluated the problem and arrived at the answer.
I differ only in the rules used in arriving at that answer. I maintain
that you can't use your own rules, even if they are logically sound. The
reason is that these rules are arbitrary, they have no mathematical
basis, They are just used for uniformity, so everyone will interpret these
expressions in the same way.

All I am claiming is that someone (or many someone's) have decided that there
is a specific way we should write and interpret math expressions. And if we
are going to present such an expression, we should expect that it will be
evaluated according to those standards.

What we are seeing here are two different standards used for evaluating
the expression, and hence two different answers. Niether is right or wrong,
they are just using different standards.

But math doesn't work well with multiple standards. They need to be very
precise. No one should ever get two different answers for an expression.
That is why the order of precedece is precisely determined. We all have to
use the same rules.

This is very simple - some of us are using the wrong rules.

So which are right? Look up "formal mathematics".

9. ### piece of ashFriend of Leo's

Posts:
3,287
Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
Location:
Sugar Land, TX
uhhhhh.. O.K.?

10. ### piece of ashFriend of Leo's

Posts:
3,287
Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
Location:
Sugar Land, TX
Does this equation really conform exactly to any formal standard? I've made it through differentials and Laplace (not a mathematician)... I would bounce this back to the creator and say do it over.

11. ### TGDoctor of Teleocity

Posts:
11,497
Joined:
Jan 23, 2004
Location:
The wild west of Ireland
I just googled it and the first thing I saw was...

So is 48÷2x identical to 48 ÷ 2 x (x) these days?

That makes
48 the same as
2x

48x
2

???

As said earlier, the lack of an x between the 2 and the (9+3) associates them together as the number 48 is to be divided by.

12. ### megafiddleFormer Member

Posts:
610
Joined:
Feb 27, 2011
Location:
VA
The form of the equation (expression, actually) is fine. The whole question
is how it should be evaluated. I believe the rules are very well defined and
will produce a single unique answer.

13. ### Joe-BobDoctor of Teleocity

Posts:
10,012
Joined:
Sep 6, 2004
Location:
Dallas, Texas
After thinking about it some more, I'm gonna change my answer to 2.

14. ### piece of ashFriend of Leo's

Posts:
3,287
Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
Location:
Sugar Land, TX
I am begining to think this is the handiwork of a very bored un-dead cat in a box somewhere seeking retribution.

And yes... this is an expression... My point is that if the expression were written differently (dodging the issue of correctness)... than there should no question as to how to evaluate it.

Posts:
16,921
Joined:
Apr 25, 2004
Location:
North Wales
16. ### piece of ashFriend of Leo's

Posts:
3,287
Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
Location:
Sugar Land, TX
I can't even spell Schroedinger!

17. ### getbentTelefiedSilver Supporter

Posts:
38,953
Joined:
Mar 2, 2006
Location:
San Benito County, California
Sorry Joe Bob, we already said pencils down.

Not to worry though, the test will be given again in pi * 2012 years.

18. ### J-manDoctor of TeleocityAd Free Member

Posts:
16,921
Joined:
Apr 25, 2004
Location:
North Wales
Which leads me on to something else.. I always failed at things requiring knowledge of equations because I could never remember them. Yet, I can spell just about any word even if its spelling is far removed from the logical phonetic spelling, with no thought even required..

19. ### megafiddleFormer Member

Posts:
610
Joined:
Feb 27, 2011
Location:
VA
I believe it does conform. The division sign, ÷ , is usually a / ,(forward slash),
but it represents the same thing, division.

One does have to be careful, math symbols have precise meanings.

20. ### megafiddleFormer Member

Posts:
610
Joined:
Feb 27, 2011
Location:
VA
That is good practice even when the rules of precedence are known.
Much easier to read the expresssions.

I like the way this is veering of into quantum physics.

IMPORTANT: Treat everyone here with respect, no matter how difficult!
No sex, drug, political, religion or hate discussion permitted here.