To: gwilhelm56
the lack of a stated arithmetic operator between the 2 and the (9+3) associates them. That is the way you can build in an implied * to the equation
answer is 2
To: BoringGuy
the lack of a stated arithmetic operator between the 2 and the (9+3) associates them. That is the way you can build in an implied * to the equation answer is 2 Good answer.
41 posted on
04/12/2011 1:49:00 PM PDT by
bkepley
To: BoringGuy
Where is a mathematician when you need one???
And leave it to people on a political site to manage to ignite a debate over an equation!!!!!
To: BoringGuy
**the lack of a stated arithmetic operator between the 2 and the (9+3) associates them. That is the way you can build in an implied * to the equation
answer is 2**
That was the way I was taught. In ENGLISH
fortyeight divided by the answer from 2 times the answer from 9 plus 3 equals what.
50 posted on
04/12/2011 1:51:32 PM PDT by
gwilhelm56
(islam ... church of the Perpetually Offended!)
To: BoringGuy
I like this answer because to my intuition I multiplied the 2(9+3) first and I don’t think I would have done that if it had been written 2 * (9+3). 2(9+3) makes it obvious the whole thing has to be done in that way and the answer is 2.
80 posted on
04/12/2011 2:01:44 PM PDT by
bkepley
To: BoringGuy
110 posted on
04/12/2011 2:13:19 PM PDT by
Flightdeck
(If you hear me yell "Eject, Eject, Eject!" the last two will be echos...)
To: BoringGuy
That is the way you can build in an implied * to the equation Nope, operators with equal precedence MUST be performed from left to right. You cannot arbitrarily use parenthesis that were not already there.
169 posted on
04/12/2011 2:52:25 PM PDT by
GingisK
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson