Andy Sneap & Backstage Productions  

Go Back   Ultimate Metal Forum > Heavy Metal Forums > Andy Sneap > Bar
Register FAQ Donate Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Bar Everything else.

View Poll Results: 48/2(9+3) = ?
2 72 49.66%
288 73 50.34%
Voters: 145. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:27 AM   #26 (permalink)
motomoto
Senior Member
 
motomoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutant View Post
LOL this is great



The 86 is clearly smarter than the 85 !


Haaaaaaaaahahahaha


My 83 is clearly smarter than your 85 too
__________________
I like to move it move it
motomoto is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:29 AM   #27 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutant View Post
blah blah blah blah

AB means and will always mean just one thing: A*B
AB means A*B, but A(B) means (A*B).

The "2" in the original equation is not a value unto itself, it's just a quantity of (9+3). That's it. You don't divide 48 by 2, you divide it by two QUANTITIES of (9+3).
__________________
Arcana Recordings
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:33 AM   #28 (permalink)
Mutant
I hate that supercow !
 
Mutant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Poland
Posts: 2,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWinterSnow View Post
The fatal flaw that is not being recognized is that all "expressions" MUST BE SIMPLIFIED!!!
And what happens if you simplify by removing the parenthesis without adding the * sign ???

Do you like how this looks ?

A=10
B=20
C=30
D=40

A/B(C+D)

10/2050

Looks right to you ? It doesn't to me...

10/20*50 looks much better to me.
__________________
I like BOOBIES !!!
48/2(9+3)=288
Mutant is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:40 AM   #29 (permalink)
xmortumx
Senior Member
 
xmortumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 616
Simple, order of operations guys... i think the problem here is the way you type the problem... 48/2(9+3)
1. Do parenthesis (9+3) = 11
2. Division, then Multiplication 48/2= 24 * (12) = 288

If you guys say = 2 then one would have to type problem like this..
48/(2(9+3)) then it would be 2.
__________________
xmortumx is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:40 AM   #30 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
How are you ignoring this fundamental thing we're saying over and over and over and over again???

A/B(C+D) IS NOT EQUAL TO A/B*(C+D)

In your example, using the exact equation you gave:

Equation: A/B(C+D)
Substitution: 10/20(30+40)
Simplification: 10/20(70), and since parenthesis are solved first, it's 10/140
Solve: 1/14 = .071
__________________
Arcana Recordings
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:41 AM   #31 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by xmortumx View Post
Simple, order of operations guys... i think the problem here is the way you type the problem... 48/2(9+3)
1. Do parenthesis (9+3) = 11
2. Division, then Multiplication 48/2= 24 * (12) = 288

If you guys say = 2 then one would have to type problem like this..
48/(2(9+3)) then it would be 2.
No no no no no no no.

It's still 2(12), it's two quantities of whatever is inside the parentheses, so you still solve those before moving onto division.
__________________
Arcana Recordings
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:44 AM   #32 (permalink)
TheWinterSnow
Den Mørke Natt
 
TheWinterSnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutant View Post
Quote me any serious book that adds one more rule to the standard.

Parentheses
Exponents
DM Division and Multiplication
AS Addition and Subtraction

Should it be

Parentheses
Exponents
MD Multiplication and Division (but Multiplication first if there is no * sign)
AS Addition and Subtraction

???

AB means and will always mean just one thing: A*B
There is another rule that is not connected to PEMDAS but does effect it, they mention both rules in high school but for whatever reason never tell you that they are interconnected. That only happens in high school when they are cramming calculus down your throat.

Like I have said many times so far you HAVE to simply expressions, this was something you should have learned very well in any basic algebra class around the same time you learned PEMDAS. Simplifying expressions always comes before you can do anything else. The P in PEMDAS means that you have to simply what is in the parenthesis, simplify means, get rid of the parenthesis entirely before you continue on and in our given equation the step to get rid of the parenthesis looks something like this:

= 48/2(9+3)
= 48/2(12)
= 48/24
= 2


Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffTD View Post
AB means A*B, but A(B) means (A*B).

The "2" in the original equation is not a value unto itself, it's just a quantity of (9+3). That's it. You don't divide 48 by 2, you divide it by two QUANTITIES of (9+3).
exactly, you can use a quantity of an expression to divide another number because that would mean you would go from having 2 quantities of 9+3 to 12 quantities of 9+3
__________________


My band's Facebook
Download our EP
TheWinterSnow is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:44 AM   #33 (permalink)
xmortumx
Senior Member
 
xmortumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 616
But were dealing with order of operations here....
Rule 1: First perform any calculations inside parentheses.
Rule 2: Next perform all multiplications and divisions, working from left to right.
Rule 3: Lastly, perform all additions and subtractions, working from left to right.
__________________
xmortumx is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:46 AM   #34 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
Once again, missing the point entirely.


Do we seriously have to FOIL this out? It's basic distributive property.

2(9+3) can also be written as ((2*9)+(2*3)) if you go back to 9th grade and distribute the 2 out to the numbers it's bound to by parentheses.
__________________
Arcana Recordings
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:49 AM   #35 (permalink)
Morgan C
MAX LOUD PRESETS¯\(°_o)/¯
 
Morgan C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,675
I'm surprised. Most other sources for this have a pretty even 50/50 split between 2 and 288. When I first saw it I thought 'of course its 2, anyone thinking 288 is a retard', but when I saw an explanation, 288 is the most logical answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffTD View Post
A/B(C+D) IS NOT EQUAL TO A/B*(C+D)
I'm sorry, what?

I haven't done maths in a while, but I did top level maths in highschool, which AFAIK is about equal to first or second year uni level maths in the US, just for reference. Not that this matters because this is 8th grade stuff, and not ONCE have I ever heard this statement uttered.

A(B+C) = A*(B+C). They are EXACTLY the same. I dunno where you've picked this up. Usually it doesn't matter, but here it does.

= 48/2(9+3)
= 48 ÷ 2 * (9+3) [ this statement is exactly the same as the one above / = ÷; A(B+C) = A*(B+C). ]
= 24 * 12
= 288



I think we need JBroll up in here.

edit: my internet is being retarded so I'm like 4 posts late, argument still stands though. Give me a refernce for A(B+C) = A*(B+C) because I have never in my life heard that.
__________________
Morgan C is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:55 AM   #36 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
A(B+C) is "A quantities of the sum of B and C," not "A times the sum of B and C."

A is latched to (B+C) and has to be solved as ((A*B)+(A*C)). We can simplify (B+C) so we don't have to distribute the 2, but it still stands that it's 2(something), and not 2 as a separate integer times (something).

*edit*
I realize it sounds retarded to say that "two of x is not equal to two times x," because in that isolated instance they are most definitely equal. The problem is that "two of x" reacts completely different than "2 times x" when paired with equations like in the OP.
__________________
Arcana Recordings
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 02:56 AM   #37 (permalink)
TheWinterSnow
Den Mørke Natt
 
TheWinterSnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,066
Now that I think about it 48/2*(9+3) would still be two because the correct notation would still be

48
----- = 2
2*12

if you wanted the correct notation to give you 288, it would have to be written

48
----- (9+3) = 288
2

This is why computer notation SUCKS!!!
__________________


My band's Facebook
Download our EP
TheWinterSnow is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:01 AM   #38 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
Despite being from NorCal, the snowy man is correct.

The problem is that in computerspeak it's ambiguous - it's unclear if whoever wrote the equation means for it to be (48/2)(9+3) or if they want it to be (48)/(2(9+3)).

That said, it's still completely wrong to interpret 2(9+3) as 2*(9+3).
__________________
Arcana Recordings
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:03 AM   #39 (permalink)
Morgan C
MAX LOUD PRESETS¯\(°_o)/¯
 
Morgan C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffTD View Post
A(B+C) is "A quantities of the sum of B and C," not "A times the sum of B and C."

A is latched to (B+C) and has to be solved as ((A*B)+(A*C)). We can simplify (B+C) so we don't have to distribute the 2, but it still stands that it's 2(something), and not 2 as a separate integer times (something).

*edit*
I realize it sounds retarded to say that "two of x is not equal to two times x," because in that isolated instance they are most definitely equal. The problem is that "two of x" reacts completely different than "2 times x" when paired with equations like in the OP.
Ok what if we split it up.

2x and 2*x are the exact same thing, right? Or are even those 'paired'? I need a source on this, because it's just not right.

Lets make it 48/2(x), where x=9+3. Same equation.

= 48 / 2 (x)
= 48 ÷ 2 * x
= 24 * x
= 24 * (9+3)
= 288.

Unless you can provide some proof that a / sign means that absolutely everything in the entire equation following that sign is now a denominator, or that 2x != 2*x, or at least 2*x is not 'as important' as 2x, then I don't know what to say.
__________________
Morgan C is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:04 AM   #40 (permalink)
Derykus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 222
FOIL? LMFAO!
Derykus is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:04 AM   #41 (permalink)
xmortumx
Senior Member
 
xmortumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 616
I know that we foil but in this case we dont have and extra parenthesis to tell us that 2 is "latched" to 12
48/2(9+3)

How can we assume that this problem is
48/(2(9+3)) ????

Thats what I dont get about your explanation man, Ive had many of these types of problems and I have always worked through them using
the order of operations method and managed to get it right. To be fair ive taken a couple of math classes so far up to Calculus II.
__________________
xmortumx is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:12 AM   #42 (permalink)
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
 
JeffTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 12,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgan C View Post
Ok what if we split it up.

2x and 2*x are the exact same thing, right? Or are even those 'paired'? I need a source on this, because it's just not right.

Lets make it 48/2(x), where x=9+3. Same equation.

= 48 / 2 (x)
= 48 ÷ 2 * x
= 24 * x
= 24 * (9+3)
= 288.

Unless you can provide some proof that a / sign means that absolutely everything in the entire equation following that sign is now a denominator, or that 2x != 2*x, or at least 2*x is not 'as important' as 2x, then I don't know what to say.
Like I said, it sounds retarded isolated but it changes how the equations react.

I know that 2 is 'latched' to (9+3) because it's written as 2(9+3) and not 2*(9+3).

In your example, you need to solve for X first, because it's 2 quantities of x, not just 2 times x. The isolated product is the same, but you need to do it first to simplify the equation.



Deryk, I know FOIL is for two separate binomials... don't really give a fuck in this case, it's the same logic.



mortum, we can't assume the problem is written as anything really, because it wasn't written - it was typed. That's why we're running into issues. If this person wrote it out in standard notation, it'd be obvious as to which term was a denominator and which was supposed to be dealt with after the division. In this case, since it's written as 2(9+3), as per my explanations above, we have to assume that it's (48)/(2(9+3)).

In the math classes you'd have taken, the professor (hopefully) wouldn't be dumb enough to be as ambiguous as the author of this equation.
__________________
Arcana Recordings

Last edited by JeffTD : April 8th, 2011 at 03:14 AM.
JeffTD is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:16 AM   #43 (permalink)
Derykus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffTD View Post
In the math classes you'd have taken, the professor (hopefully) wouldn't be dumb enough to be as ambiguous as the author of this equation.
I'll agree with that. Case closed.
Derykus is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:17 AM   #44 (permalink)
xmortumx
Senior Member
 
xmortumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffTD View Post
mortum, we can't assume the problem is written as anything really, because it wasn't written - it was typed. That's why we're running into issues. If this person wrote it out in standard notation, it'd be obvious as to which term was a denominator and which was supposed to be dealt with after the division. In this case, since it's written as 2(9+3), as per my explanations above, we have to assume that it's (48)/(2(9+3)).

In the math classes you'd have taken, the professor (hopefully) wouldn't be dumb enough to be as ambiguous as the author of this equation.

Ah i see your point now, this is something that is hard to catch on though.
__________________
xmortumx is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:44 AM   #45 (permalink)
FIXXXER
¯\(°_o)/¯
 
FIXXXER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,160
42
FIXXXER is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 03:44 AM   #46 (permalink)
FloridaRolf
W.A.T.
 
FloridaRolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 760
Wow. Didn't know math could cause such emotions.
FloridaRolf is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 04:27 AM   #47 (permalink)
Machinated
Senior Member
 
Machinated's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 3,867
2
__________________
Ed Sokolowski

Follow me on facebook: EAS STUDIOS

Follow me on twitter - http://twitter.com/easstudios

Drum Quantizing + Reamping available + Production + Mixing - PM me for details
Machinated is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 04:29 AM   #48 (permalink)
ahjteam
Anssi Tenhunen
 
ahjteam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virrat/Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 9,397
http://www.google.com/search?q=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
__________________
Check out my youtube channel for audio production tutorials
http://www.youtube.com/ahjteam

http://soundcloud.com/ahjteam/sets/debut-album
ahjteam is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 04:31 AM   #49 (permalink)
FIXXXER
¯\(°_o)/¯
 
FIXXXER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahjteam View Post
+1
FIXXXER is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2011, 05:23 AM   #50 (permalink)
Fragle
Senior Member
 
Fragle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,042
288 imho, but the equation is unclear as fuck.

the way i see it, 48/(2(9+3)) = 2, and 48/2(9+3) = 288. if there's no parenthesis, there is none. i just don't understand why many of you guys interpret it that way.

and 2(9+3) is the EXACT same thing as 2*(9+3). AB = A*B.

also, major +1 to this one:
"In the math classes you'd have taken, the professor (hopefully) wouldn't be dumb enough to be as ambiguous as the author of this equation."
__________________
www.retaliationdeath.de
Fragle is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0
© Copyright 2000-2014 UltimateMetal.com | MetalAges Media