48÷2(9+3) = ?

[grundle]

Texas Instruments TI-85 says:

48÷2(9+3) = 2

But Texas Instruments TI-86 says:

48÷2(9+3) = 288

[re_nortex]

I got 0x120.

I just tried it again and got 0440. My Perl is borken.

[mmichaels1970]

That’s cool, tricky ain’t it?

Yes....considering I'm thinking about changing my mind again after reading a post at physics forums discussing the very same problem. A dude there has a very convincing argument that:

The general consensus among math people is that "multiplication by juxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next to each other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations.

This is strengthened by a link at ask dr. math that provides a broken link to the American Mathematical Society (AMS) as a source.

Sure wish the link wasn't broken....but heck....I think I'm going back to my original argument.

[Sacajaweau]

Let’s ask.....”The Donald”

[glennaro]

(Please excuse my dear Aunt Sally)= (parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, subtaction.)This is the correct order of operations

Not quite true, my friend. It's: "parenthesis, exponents, multiplication and division, ..." -- that is, multiplication and division are of the same rank.

[jda]

Absent parentheses defining the order of calculation, the rule is to go left to right multiplying and dividing, then left to right adding and subtracting. Therefore,

1. (9 + 3) is first, because it’s in parentheses = 12
No other parentheses, so you go left to right
2. 48 ÷ 2 = 24
3. 24 x 12 = 288

[cydcharisse]

The answer is 6.8.

[MarkL]

288 is easy, no gizmos needed... 256 (0x100) plus 32 (0x20)

Mark

[isaiah55version11_0]

To add to the fun...In Java:

int x = 48 / 2 *(9+3);

System.out.println(x);

288

The compiler will not let you do 48 / 2(9+3)

[ThomasThomas]

It on the calculator as

48/2(9+3) or

48____
2(9+3)

= 2

[Hoodat]

That is correct, because perenthesis supercede multiplication and division.

2 = (the number of spelling errors in your post)

[Dixie Yooper]

Is the one which came up with 288 a reverse polar notation calculator?

[Bikkuri]

Thank you... What I said, but in much better detail ;)

BTW.. all of you talking about calculators and slide rulers... When/where I went to school... we weren’t allowed to use either :/ (calculators cost about $45-$120 then.. and they were too big to sneak in class).. haven’t even tried it on a calculator yet, but I am tempted to try and see if it says anything different now..

Bikk

[DennisR]

wish u were my banker... :)

[gwilhelm56]

that is it ...

2

[meyer]

#2 next would be the other equation (48/2)..

Nope - 2(9+3) has priority due to parenthesis. The distributive property of multiplication tells us that 2(9+3) = (2*9)+(2*3) = 18+6 = 24 = 2(9+3) = 2*12. To say otherwise is to violate this basic algebra principle.

[RikaStrom]

48÷2(9+3)

#1 the () is the priority..
#2 next would be the other equation (48/2)..
#3 the () is multiplied times the answer of #2
#4 288

Now, see the way I was taught, back in the day was

48÷2(9+3)

#1 the () is the priority..9+3=12
#2 is the implied * between 2 and (9+3) 2 = 2*12 = 24
I was taught that if there was any number next to a paran - it was implied that you would multiply that number by whatever result came from the paran equation.
#3 is the remaining divider 48/24 = 2

The answer is 2

I love FR, only here would we get into this discussion. :-)

[Bikkuri]

No,, Laz was thinking of:
O O
v

[meyer]

2 = (the number of spelling errors in your post)

:-) So I've turned it into a word problem.

[starlifter]

Nope.

But there is a chicken theme.

[txhurl]

So TI needs to recall the 85’s succesor, the 86?