[SeaHawkFan]

For 288 to be the correct answer, the problem would have to be:

48 divided by 2 x (9+3),

but the problem is 48 divided by 2(9+3) = 2

It has always been understood that 2(9+3) is simply a shortened form of (2 x (9+3)).

[MortMan]

It has always been understood that 2(9+3) is simply a shortened form of (2 x (9+3))

I've never seen that anywhere. There is no rule of precedence I am aware of that extends the parenthetical precedence outside the parenthesis.

Can you provide a citation to support this assertion? All of the searches I have done don't mention it.

I agree that 2(9+3) is a shortened form of 2*(9+3), but I disagree that it implies parenthesis around the multiplication.