48÷2(9+3) = ?

[kenmdotexe]

48÷2(9+3) = 288
48÷2(12) = 288
24x12 = 288

Division is to be done first before proceeding to multiplication since division is basically at the right. Multipication and division are equal in status in Pemdas, and Division is to be done first in the Standard Order of Operations( SOOO ). What you do is simply start from the left and go to the right. Thus both rule simplify both to 288!

Is that right folks? i'm still a kid...

 

[GeneO]

He he Micky, you went to school a loooong time ago.

Ok, suppose we solve like this.

48÷2(9+3)
= 48÷2(12)

Now, as per BODMAS, the division operator takes precedence over the (implied) multiplication operator so:

=24(12)
=288.

Can I vote again?

It is not that division takes precedence, but when there is ambiguity (with operators of equal precedence) then the calculation is performed left to right:

48÷2(9+3) do the parens first
48÷2*12 equal precedence operators, go from left to right
24*12 =
288

Division has the same precedence as multiplication since, after all, A/B*C = A*(1/B)*C

The best way to write that expression so it is not misunderstood, is (48/2)*(9+3)

 

[ausGeoff]

Google likes (48 ÷ 2) * (9 + 3) = 288

—That's good enough for me.

 

[clunkfish]

It's kind of a pointless argument because the syntax is incorrect. You cannot imply multiplication of numbers by writing them next to each other - otherwise 23 could equal 6. This is true even when one of the numbers is an exclusively numerical expression in parentheses, so you cannot write 2(9+3). You could write 2(9a+3), but not 2(9+3). You'd have to write 2*(9+3). So neither 2 nor 288 is correct because the question is not valid.

Despite all that, I voted for 2

 

[boogieboy]

288 ...

final answer.

 

[Everlong]

Multiplication doesn't have precedence over division though and vice versa. If they're the only two operands left in the sum, then you simply just work left to right and in this case it would be divide then multiply, hence you get 288.

You get the A+.

Thanks, prof

 

[GeneO]

It's kind of a pointless argument because the syntax is incorrect. You cannot imply multiplication of numbers by writing them next to each other - otherwise 23 could equal 6. This is true even when one of the numbers is an exclusively numerical expression in parentheses, so you cannot write 2(9+3). You could write 2(9a+3), but not 2(9+3). You'd have to write 2*(9+3). So neither 2 nor 288 is correct because the question is not valid.

Despite all that, I voted for 2

The syntax is fine. That is how it is done in mathematics all the time - omission of a multiplication sign when the number is multiplying a quantity in parentheses. In fact, usually when there is no ambiguity, like 2x=y, the multiplication operator is omitted.

 

[arkhi]

LOL. This problem reminds me of this:

Let a=b

a²=ab <-multiply both sides by a
a²-b²=ab-b² <-subtract both sides with b²
(a+b)(a-b)=b(a-b) <-factor out
(a+b)=b <-divide both sides with (a-b)
a+a=a <-since a=b...
2a=a <-simplify and divide both sides with a
2=1

 

[clunkfish]

divide both sides with (a-b)

But a=b, so a-b=0: and you can't divide by zero

 

[The Howling Wolves]

divide both sides with (a-b)

But a=b, so a-b=0: and you can't divide by zero

You can divide and multiply by zero...........but your answer will be zer0

 

[clunkfish]

You can divide and multiply by zero...........but your answer will be zer0

Division by zero gives an "undefined" answer: you can't divide by zero.

 

[Win7User512]

Division by zero is infinity (the y-axis).

 

[clunkfish]

Division by zero is infinity (the y-axis).

Oh no it isn't: Math Forum: Ask Dr. Math FAQ: Dividing by Zero

 

[arkhi]

....and you can't divide by zero

 

[Win7User512]

Division by zero is infinity (the y-axis).

Oh no it isn't: Math Forum: Ask Dr. Math FAQ: Dividing by Zero

I didn't mean in the sense of an equation. A math teacher of mine once said either it was "infinite" or "infinity". I don't remember which. But it was not in the context of an equation. Rather, looking at a graph, and theoretically.

In the practical sense, though it is undefined and meaningless.

 

[profdlp]

My math teacher told me πr². When I pointed out that pies are round he threw me out of the class.

 

[Win7User512]

My math teacher told me πr². When I pointed out that pies are round he threw me out of the class.

Nice. Gotta remember that one.

 

[Ciara]

My math teacher told me πr². When I pointed out that pies are round he threw me out of the class.

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

 

[Hopalong X]

My math teacher told me πr². When I pointed out that pies are round he threw me out of the class.

..of course it would be an Apple iPie!!!!

 

[Dave76]

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao: