5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))=?

SDkitty

:flowerforyou: :laugh:

vtmoon

10,167,463,313,313
10,167,463,313,376

Are actually both correct.

8*7/7*8 can be correctly interpreted as both 64 and 1. Just depends on if you consider it an in-line division symbol or 8*7 OVER 7*8

I am guessing you are early 40s/late 30s? There was a brief time where the order of operations was taught improperly in many areas.

The standing rule is PEDMAS Left to right, and the intent must be explicit brackets and parenthesis.

True, but the / isn't really a mathematical symbol .. so it's still open to interpretation.

This is one of those problems where different brands of calculators will give you different answers, depending on how they interpret /

This is not a calculator, this website is a computer based platform, so "/" will always mean division this isn't open for debate, it is an agreed upon standard.

Or ... as I posted previously ..

Similarly, there can be ambiguity in the use of the slash ('/') symbol... For example, the manuscript submission instructions for the Physical Review journals state that multiplication is of higher precedence than division with a slash. (source "Physical Review Style and Notation Guide". American Physical Society. Section IV–E–2. Retrieved 5 August 2012.)

It absolutely is open to debate.

Isn't that just explaining that the order of PEMDAS puts the M before the D?





(before the D :laugh: )

Depends on the interpretation of the order of operations too. Multiplication, THEN division .. or multiplication and division in a straight line from left to right.

AND not THEN is the rule. Left to right.

sullus

AND not THEN is the rule. Left to right.

True.

Used to be that implied multiplication (ie. 2x) had higher precedence, but that's changing now too. Nowadays 2x/2x=x^2, when it used to = 1

2 * x / 2 * x

= (2x) / 2 * x
= x * x

xinit0

As any math instructor would tell you - "screw you and your order of operations - USE BRACKETS"

Morninglory81

10167463313372!

Done

crista_b

AND not THEN is the rule. Left to right.

True.

Used to be that implied multiplication (ie. 2x) had higher precedence, but that's changing now too. Nowadays 2x/2x=x^2, when it used to = 1

2 * x / 2 * x

= (2x) / 2 * x
= x * x

This wasn't making sense. Then i see the problem 2x = x + x.

(x + x) / (x + x) = 1

Edited for derp.

sullus

AND not THEN is the rule. Left to right.

True.

Used to be that implied multiplication (ie. 2x) had higher precedence, but that's changing now too. Nowadays 2x/2x=x^2, when it used to = 1

2 * x / 2 * x

= (2x) / 2 * x
= x * x

This wasn't making sense. Then i see the problem 2x = x + x.

(x + x) / (x + x) = 1

I don't see 2x as being 2*x because there's no parentheses around the x or a multiplication symbol between them so 2x/2x =/= x^2 because 2x = x + x
2x =/= 2*x

Wolfram Alpha changed in early 2013 to treat implied multiplication the same as explicit multiplication (formerly, implied multiplication without parentheses was assumed to bind stronger than explicit multiplication). 2x/2x, 2*x/2*x, and 2(x)/2(x) now all yield x^2. The TI 89 and TI 86 calculators also yield x^2 in all three cases.

diodelcibo

But who was clear notation?

crista_b

AND not THEN is the rule. Left to right.

True.

Used to be that implied multiplication (ie. 2x) had higher precedence, but that's changing now too. Nowadays 2x/2x=x^2, when it used to = 1

2 * x / 2 * x

= (2x) / 2 * x
= x * x

This wasn't making sense. Then i see the problem 2x = x + x.

(x + x) / (x + x) = 1

I don't see 2x as being 2*x because there's no parentheses around the x or a multiplication symbol between them so 2x/2x =/= x^2 because 2x = x + x
2x =/= 2*x

Wolfram Alpha changed in early 2013 to treat implied multiplication the same as explicit multiplication (formerly, implied multiplication without parentheses was assumed to bind stronger than explicit multiplication). 2x/2x, 2*x/2*x, and 2(x)/2(x) now all yield x^2. The TI 89 and TI 86 calculators also yield x^2 in all three cases.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't understand how 2x can be implied to be multiplication. I just can't wrap my own brain around it. That's like me saying, "Here's 2 3s," and someone trying to say that equals 9 because by having 2 3s, I imply that they should be multiplied. Personally, I just don't get it. :ohwell:

whierd

My care levels have normalized.

sullus

I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't understand how 2x can be implied to be multiplication. I just can't wrap my own brain around it. That's like me saying, "Here's 2 3s," and someone trying to say that equals 9 because by having 2 3s I imply that they should be multiplied. Personally, I just don't get it. :ohwell:

say x = 3

2x = 2*3 = 3+3 = 6

x=11
2x = 2 * 11 = 11 + 11 = 22

crista_b

I'm starting to go full derp.... Here comes Moon Moon.

crista_b

I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't understand how 2x can be implied to be multiplication. I just can't wrap my own brain around it. That's like me saying, "Here's 2 3s," and someone trying to say that equals 9 because by having 2 3s I imply that they should be multiplied. Personally, I just don't get it. :ohwell:

say x = 3

2x = 2*3 = 3+3 = 6

x=11
2x = 2 * 11 = 11 + 11 = 22

I forgot how to math.

*embarrassed*

krithsai

is it weird that I really really like this stuff? lol

No.

rompers16

My brain hurts.

KendleX

4x4=12

Cajoke123

Here you are. Follow P (parentheses) E (exponents) MD(Multiplication or division whatever comes first) AS (addition or subtraction whatever comes first) First do the stuff in parentheses.

18-5=13
9^13=2541865828329

Then divide and multiply

5/1=5

8*7=56

56/7=8

8*8= 64

So now your equation is 5-5+64-4+4 (2541865828329)

4* 2541865828329= 10167463313316

Now add and subtract.
5-5=0

0+64=64

64-4=60

60+10167463313316= 10167463313376

10167463313376 is your answer. This is solved by the order of operations.

HypersonicFitNess

Order of Operations PEMDAS (Paragraph, Exponent, Multiply/Divide, Add/Subtract)

5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))=?

5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^13)

5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(2.54187E+12)

5-5+60+1.01675E+13

1.01675E+13


10167463313376

xinit0

I thought the answer to everything is 42.

No, that's the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

life + the universe + everything = 42

therefore

42 - life - the universe = everything

sullus

I thought the answer to everything is 42.

No, that's the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

life + the universe + everything = 42

therefore

42 - life - the universe = everything

Yeah, but what's the question?