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

245

Replies

  • vtmoon
    vtmoon Posts: 3,436 Member
    =5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))

    =5-5+56/56-4+4(9^13)

    =0+1-4+4(2541865828329)

    =-3+10167463313316

    =10167463313313



    10,167,463,313,313


    maybe

    good thing you are gorgeous!
  • kwol18
    kwol18 Posts: 25 Member
    1.0167463e+13

    That's what I got.
  • ChangingAmanda
    ChangingAmanda Posts: 486 Member
    10,167,463,313,376

    More more!

    Wait, unless I messed it up. Then. Crap :/

    I got this as well.
  • skinnybearlyndsay
    skinnybearlyndsay Posts: 798 Member
    I have to admit, I got a little excited when I saw the math question. :smile: I :heart: math.
  • MireyGal76
    MireyGal76 Posts: 7,334 Member
    =5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))

    =5-5+56/56-4+4(9^13)

    =0+1-4+4(2541865828329)

    =-3+10167463313316

    =10167463313313



    10,167,463,313,313


    maybe

    good thing you are gorgeous!

    whoa... wait... what?
    that comes off as an insult, and really?
  • BeTheFire
    BeTheFire Posts: 102 Member
    This is an awful thread. Why did I stay here? I'm outta here. You can have your hard math with your big brains and smart stuff.....(Charlie Kelly....Its always sunny...)
  • vtmoon
    vtmoon Posts: 3,436 Member
    =5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))

    =5-5+56/56-4+4(9^13)

    =0+1-4+4(2541865828329)

    =-3+10167463313316

    =10167463313313



    10,167,463,313,313


    maybe

    good thing you are gorgeous!

    whoa... wait... what?
    that comes off as an insult, and really?

    Just teasin, can't live with myself if you were mad at my silliness.
  • Angie80281
    Angie80281 Posts: 444 Member
    is it weird that I really really like this stuff? lol

    I got really excited when I saw this post title, too.
  • debaloo
    debaloo Posts: 129 Member
    1.0167463e+13

    That's what I got.

    Yup...punched it into my graphing calculator and that's the answer.
    BTW- you can go to wolphram alpha and type in the equation and it will give you the answer in several forms.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    if [5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))] was written as [5-5/1+(8*7)/(7*8)-4+4(9^(18-5))] you'd have been correct, the little string of multiplication and division in the middle got you is all :)
  • harvo
    harvo Posts: 4,676 Member
    It is eother your calorie intake or TDEE.....Right?
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,228 Member
    This is an awful thread. Why did I stay here? I'm outta here. You can have your hard math with your big brains and smart stuff.....(Charlie Kelly....Its always sunny...)

    I love that guy!! :happy:
  • MireyGal76
    MireyGal76 Posts: 7,334 Member
    if [5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))] was written as [5-5/1+(8*7/7*8)-4+4(9^(18-5))] you'd have been correct, the little string of multiplication and division in the middle got you is all :)

    yeah, I caught that afterwards.

    good thing I'm pretty.
  • dizzzy33
    dizzzy33 Posts: 31 Member
    is it weird that I really really like this stuff? lol

    I do too!! :blushing:
  • IronPhyllida
    IronPhyllida Posts: 533 Member
    I cant find the brackets on my calculator. Help.
  • Colliex3
    Colliex3 Posts: 328 Member
    I think this is what the teacher meant when they said "your gonna need to know this when your older"
  • whierd
    whierd Posts: 14,025 Member
    I love math.:heart:
  • jmc0806
    jmc0806 Posts: 1,444 Member
    1.016746331e13
  • vtmoon
    vtmoon Posts: 3,436 Member
    if [5-5/1+8*7/7*8-4+4(9^(18-5))] was written as [5-5/1+(8*7/7*8)-4+4(9^(18-5))] you'd have been correct, the little string of multiplication and division in the middle got you is all :)

    yeah, I caught that afterwards.

    good thing I'm pretty.

    :laugh: :flowerforyou:
  • whierd
    whierd Posts: 14,025 Member
    To everyone who did this longhand as opposed to a calculator. *salute*
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    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
  • almart007
    almart007 Posts: 71 Member
    it equals x*y /z plus n
  • goalss4nika
    goalss4nika Posts: 529 Member
    idk-girl.gif


    TOO CUTE!! LOL
  • MireyGal76
    MireyGal76 Posts: 7,334 Member
    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

    actually, without brackets separating them, the order of ops is to perform all multiplications and divisions in order from left to right...

    ergo

    =8*7/7*8
    =56/7*8
    =8*8
    =64
  • whierd
    whierd Posts: 14,025 Member
    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.
  • crista_b
    crista_b Posts: 1,192 Member
    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
    Point taken, however if you start looking at it that way, the original intent is open to discussion because you could say that the opening could be interpreted as 5-5 OVER 1, i.e., 0, which changes the whole thing. I think in this case, it's best to look at it in the most common view of 7/7 being it's own entity, otherwise there would be parentheses around the 8*7.

    *edit: what whierd said...
  • grider055
    grider055 Posts: 20
    1.21 Jigawatts.
  • skinnybearlyndsay
    skinnybearlyndsay Posts: 798 Member
    Please
    Excuse
    My
    Dear
    Aunt
    Sally

    Oh, the memories. :smile:
  • whierd
    whierd Posts: 14,025 Member
    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

    actually, without brackets separating them, the order of ops is to perform all multiplications and divisions in order from left to right...

    ergo

    =8*7/7*8
    =56/7*8
    =8*8
    =64

    This. But unfortunately some people were taught incorrectly at school on how to handle this sort of problem. Some were taught to treat it as

    8*7
    _____
    8*7
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    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

    in this instance you go from left to right.(( 8*7) / 7)* 8

    if you have multiplication and division you go from left to right... same with addition and subtraction.

    Generally true, but the / symbol is mathematically ambiguous:
    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.)

Categories