What is the answer to 48/2(9+3)?

[marie_speeds]

Umm... you cant cross multiply like that. 12 over 1 = 12, so 48/2 x 12/1 equals 48/2 x 12 still....

Cross multiplying is for simplifying algebraic equations where one fraction = another. Not multiplied by another. Equals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_multiply

Also, while im there:

The standard order of operations, or precedence, is expressed in the following chart.

terms inside brackets
exponents and roots
multiplication and division
addition and subtraction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations

Can it be an more OBVIOUS?

And the 2( becomes an exponent of the bracket i.e expand the bracket. You are now changing the rules to suit your answer by implying 2x( when that is not how the original equation is written. The original equation in OP shows that 2(9+3) is the entire denominator. So to suit your change of rules I have now implied with the drawn form that was produced and from the fact that 48/2 is a fraction as implied earlier in the thread that cross mutiplication may be used where 2 fractions have different denominators....basic year form 1 maths

But as stated earlier I will ask 2 friends tomorrow one has a Phd in Electronic Engineering and the other has a Masters and is working on a Phd in Electronic Engineering. If they can't give me the answer then DSIR are doomed and Bluebird better redesign their entire production line quick smart. Oh hang on yeah sorry one of them has just had a paper on microwave technology measuring water content of logs for milling accepted for a conference in the States and an international journal so he may be too busy to look at the equation as it was written in OP.

[pzkpfw]

And the 2( becomes an exponent of the bracket ...

What exactly do you mean by "exponent"?

[bogan]

it's shorthand notation, we could similarly argue what 'spn' means if received in a text, could be spun, spin, span, son even, it's incom-bloody-plete

[Latte]

What he drew and what was in the OP are 2 different equations.....

I didn't explain it well.... what I meant was this ...



Do you still interpret the answer as 2?

[DMNTD:Me]

[Latte]

Oh, bikes..... that's what this forum is for.. forget sometimes.

[Mental Trousers]

Since when? So if everything that follows is underneath how does one write a more complex equation with multiple divisions and or fractions. By your reckoning if i was to write:

1/2+1/2

Then I would have a 3 line fraction.... and the answer would be 1/6, instead of being 1...

since a / doesn't come under a / ..... and writing complex equations usually uses brackets to sort that out.

[huff3r]

since a / doesn't come under a / ..... and writing complex equations usually uses brackets to sort that out.

So does writing simple equations. Which is why the above equation does not include the (9+3) as the denominator, otherwise there would be an extra set of brackets to specifically include it.

And as for "becomes an exponent of the bracket"...
No such thing, and if it were an exponent then the answer would be completely different, and itd be written to the right of the brackets in the format ^2.

The 2 is not attached to the brackets, it is merely lazy shorthand omitting the multiplication symbol.

As for it being shorthand, so open for interpretation. Also incorrect. It is a "shilling fraction" and therefore there are set rules as to how to write the fraction and the equation.

Oh and lastly, it is possible to have a fraction on top or underneath a fraction. It is called a Commplex Fraction. So you're argument that a / doesnt come under a / is invalid.

[MisterD]

Then go back to college. I do maths regularly

Woo-hoo, and I'm a 40 yr old bloke with a degree in something called "physics" , which is just as irrelevant.

The simple, and pertinent, fact is that the intuitive reading of the "equation" ( quotes because there's no actual equals sign in there) puts everything on each side of the '/' on separate lines. It's a neat trick, but basically the mathematical equivalent of an optical illusion.

[huff3r]

Woo-hoo, and I'm a 40 yr old bloke with a degree in something called "physics" , which is just as irrelevant.

The simple, and pertinent, fact is that the intuitive reading of the "equation" ( quotes because there's no actual equals sign in there) puts everything on each side of the '/' on separate lines. It's a neat trick, but basically the mathematical equivalent of an optical illusion.

Yup it is an illusion, because the standard and well-practised interpretation of an equation, or expression in this case, is to seperate it into terms. And each "operation" applies only to the terms directly beside it.

E.g 1+2, the + applies only to the one and two. So 48/2 the / applies only to the 48 and the 2, otherwise brackets are required to differentiate.

But thats the last I'm arguing, if people want to go through life not understanding the basics of mathematical equations, and order of operations then they are welcome too.


Also I worry about a physics major who struggles with the shorthand writing of single line equations. Especially since so many physics equations involve both fractions, and single terms, division and multiplication and complex algebra.

[Latte]

Burnout

Oh yeah, you're subliminal messages in the other video's arent that subtle

[Oblivion]

Oh yeah, you're subliminal messages in the other video's arent that subtle

Infact, they're so blatantly obvious, that they're subtle

[marie_speeds]

So does writing simple equations. Which is why the above equation does not include the (9+3) as the denominator, otherwise there would be an extra set of brackets to specifically include it.

And as for "becomes an exponent of the bracket"...
No such thing, and if it were an exponent then the answer would be completely different, and itd be written to the right of the brackets in the format ^2.

The 2 is not attached to the brackets, it is merely lazy shorthand omitting the multiplication symbol.

As for it being shorthand, so open for interpretation. Also incorrect. It is a "shilling fraction" and therefore there are set rules as to how to write the fraction and the equation.

Oh and lastly, it is possible to have a fraction on top or underneath a fraction. It is called a Commplex Fraction. So you're argument that a / doesnt come under a / is invalid.

Yup it is an illusion, because the standard and well-practised interpretation of an equation, or expression in this case, is to seperate it into terms. And each "operation" applies only to the terms directly beside it.

E.g 1+2, the + applies only to the one and two. So 48/2 the / applies only to the 48 and the 2, otherwise brackets are required to differentiate.

But thats the last I'm arguing, if people want to go through life not understanding the basics of mathematical equations, and order of operations then they are welcome too.


Also I worry about a physics major who struggles with the shorthand writing of single line equations. Especially since so many physics equations involve both fractions, and single terms, division and multiplication and complex algebra.

Xc=1/2pifC (written as a single line short hand equation just like op)

where f=50 hertz and C=80micro Farads
So Xc=?

Get it wrong and I suggest you change majors....LOL....Get it right and it means that you are using double standards when solving single line short hand equations to justify your answer by inserting brackets where none is shown LOL

[MisterD]

Xc=1/2piFC

Nicely done.

[Gubb]

Have we got a definitive answer yet?