Posted on 08/01/2019 4:58:47 AM PDT by Renkluaf
“8÷2(2+2).” Can you solve this math problem? The equation went viral online this week on Twitter causing major confusion over the right answer. Mathematicians and physicists went nuts about it. Mike Breen, the Public Awareness Officer for the American Mathematical Society, told popular Mechanics: “The way it’s written, it’s ambiguous. In math, a lot of times there are ambiguities. Mathematicians try to make rules as precise as possible.” Depending on where in the world you learned math, as Mashable reported, determines how you can solve the problem.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
“There are five lights!”
——— Picard
Bingo
Apparently when you use (alligator mouth) then (alligator mouth) it doesn’t post the in between.
That is how I do my sarcasm for the common core part...
With all due respect, Wolfram alpha gives 16, and it was developed by Stephen Wolfram, PhD, Physics, Caltech, and the youngest winner of a MacArthur Fellowship. I think he and his company know a bit more about math than the average FReeper.
Conversely, the equation could be written(8÷2)(2+2). The person who created the problem was ambiguous at best.
We agree
“Conversely, the equation could be written(8÷2)(2+2). The person who created the problem was ambiguous at best.”
I agree whole heartedly with the ambiguous part. But to come to 16, you have to drop the fact that the equation as originally written, asks for 2 times 2 plus 2. You simply cannot get around the fact that the equation calls for that. And when written as a fraction, dictates the (2(2+2)).
Also, division, by its very name implies there is division between the two. Any way you look at it, to get to 16 you have to manipulate what the question was originally asking. Not to mention the implied parenthesis (2(2+2)).
I think this is great fun, but I will go to my grave as the answer is 1.
It is an interesting exercise. But if a math teacher gave this problem to my kid, I would be upset...
It is an interesting exercise. As long as it isn’t being used for a calculation that risks lives...
“It is an interesting exercise. But if a math teacher gave this problem to my kid, I would be upset...”
Ha ha, yea you and me both! The true answer is that the equation is not written correctly. For clarity, you should see another set of brackets or parenthesis.
Either 8 / (2(2+2)) or (8/2)(2+2).
the moderators removed that for their only rules
“Either 8 / (2(2+2)) or (8/2)(2+2).”
I will say this, if you read the original equation, as written in the article 8 / (2(2+2)) is correct. In no way does the original question read 8 divided by 2 times 2 plus 2. It clearly reads 8 divided by 2 times 2 plus 2.
Snow flakes melting. So sad.
lol
i love that gif...
and the sentiment
t
It’s not an either/or situation. There is an implied multiplication operator before the parenthesis.
8÷2(2+2) = 8 ÷ 2 x (2 + 2)
= 8 ÷ 2 x 4
= 4 x 4
= 16
Parenthesis are not an operator, they are a grouping notation to specify that an operation should be performed outside of its natural order.
“How does 2(2+2) equal 1/2?”
It doesn’t, of course - but you know the argument is whether you multiply or divide first. I would multiply, working out from the parentheses... As I would do if punching into a calculator.
8/2(2+2)
You’ve separated like I would, getting 8 divided by 2(4).
8/(2x(2+2))
But lots of folks say you have to separate by 8/2 x 4
(8/2)x(2+2)
My senior year of high school was when electronic calculators became common. They only had four functions, and did not have parentheses.
You punched in the parenthetical calculation first, and worked out. If you do it that way, you get 1. If you use the one you posted, you get 16.
Bingo. Well done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.