48/2(9+3)

Instead of making the answer (look) ambigous or make people question what you're really trying to convey, why not make it intuitive? Like this:



In common usage, division and multiplication takes an atomic value in front of it and an atomic value afterwards. An atomic value is something indivisible, or, if you want to, the "shortest"/easiest way to express a number. So 2 is an atom, and 9 + 3 is not an atom. As you guys probably have learned today, people may "debate" whether 4x is an atom or not, and whether 2(9 + 3) or 2(12) is an atom. Common usage is: If it can't be shortened more, it is an atom, otherwise it isn't.

Using common usage, the answer is 288. Using common sense, don't write mathematical expression which may be ambigous.

Noah

[COLOR="green"]I don't see exactly how you can effectively prove intelligence based simply on what can be referred to as nothing more than a trick to the eyes.

It's like math problems on tests that end up like this. All you're proving is how good people are at noticing small differences, not the actual fact of if they can do math.[/COLOR]

I got 288..

is it 48/[2(9+3)] or (48/2)*(9+3)

Depending on what it is determines your answer.

is it 48/[2(9+3)] or (48/2)*(9+3)

Depending on what it is determines your answer.

And that is determined by how you read it, and by which order of operations you go by, PEMDAS or BEDMAS.

48/2(9+3)
= 48 / 2 * (9+3)
= 48 / 2 * 12
= 24 * 12
= 288

Instead of making the answer (look) ambigous or make people question what you're really trying to convey, why not make it intuitive? Like this:



In common usage, division and multiplication takes an atomic value in front of it and an atomic value afterwards. An atomic value is something indivisible, or, if you want to, the "shortest"/easiest way to express a number. So 2 is an atom, and 9 + 3 is not an atom. As you guys probably have learned today, people may "debate" whether 4x is an atom or not, and whether 2(9 + 3) or 2(12) is an atom. Common usage is: If it can't be shortened more, it is an atom, otherwise it isn't.

Using common usage, the answer is 2. Using common sense, don't write mathematical expression which may be ambigous.

Noah

(since this is still the funhouse)

Yay for ambiguous mathematical expressions!

Thread degenerated into "intelligent" derping.

288

288

But I already did that
Well, yeah. Thread just needs to be closed.

But I already did that
Well, yeah. Thread just needs to be closed.

This is not the rubrik's cube, threads don't get closed just because they got derailed.

I prefer BEDMAS. Answer is 288.

I prefer BEDMAS. Answer is 288.

Listen to Princess Peach right here.

Not to be mistake the word btch, she's just DR.Mario's wife and all.

Guys, I think the answer is 288.

I totally did the problem myself and didn't just post what everyone else posted.

[video=youtube;YersIyzsOpc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YersIyzsOpc[/video]

They say it's cus of WoW but I believe it's him trying to figure out this math problem.

[video=youtube;YersIyzsOpc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YersIyzsOpc[/video]

They say it's cus of WoW but I believe it's him trying to figure out this math problem.

Fake/2(1+4)

Fake/2(1+4)

It's fake that he's angry, he's obvioulsy contemplating the problem. Genius' are so misunderstood you know

WolframAlpha gets 288.

The above posted has said it best.