6?2(1+2)= ?

[Smack]

You just about "sum" it up. If you have 1 guy and two females (1+2) and they all get 2 drinks each 2(1+2) and another 3 folk come to join them to drink the drinks. Then how much drink does everyone consume, assuming they all consume an equal amount. 6/2(2+1). If they all got 9 drinks each then I'm pisssssssed

 

Nah... there's me and two guys I know (1+2). Everyone has brought the wife. 2(1+2). I've only bought six pints. 6/2(1+2)

[Budgie.]

What do you think of my real life scenario? I poured my heart and soul into it and would genuinely be interested as to what you think. Scroll up a bit and you'll find it. I should show my colours and state that I think it's 1

 

To be honest I can't see how to link it to the sum. I can understand the merit in trying to explain it in a real life context but can't see how it makes a difference. The numbers could stand for pints, bananas or any other object. What we do with those pints still relies on the rules of mathematics, more specifically the order of operations rules.

[P-Dizzle]

see post #346

 

What, the bit where you quote ill-informed internet rhetoric? [modedit]

 

Implied partentheses was brought up as a way of explaining your fallacy when getting the answer 9.

 

Implied partentheses are there, as is implied multiplication. You take it as given that 2(3) is 6 before any division is required, therefore no multiplication is required after division and you can only be left with the answer 1.

 

At what point do you remove (3) from the sum, and multiply it against the answer from 6/2 at a later stage? Where is the reasoning behind that?

[Budgie.]

What, the bit where you quote ill-informed internet rhetoric? [modedit]

 

Implied partentheses was brought up as a way of explaining your fallacy when getting the answer 9.

 

Implied partentheses are there, as is implied multiplication. You take it as given that 2(3) is 6 before any division is required, therefore no multiplication is required after division and you can only be left with the answer 1.

 

At what point do you remove (3) from the sum, and multiply it against the answer from 6/2 at a later stage? Where is the reasoning behind that?

 

According to google, "implied parentheses" can only exist where the sum is expressed as a fraction.

 

This isn't a fraction.

 

Ergo, your argument is dead in the water!

[Das Root]

 

Are you serious? I'm using that to point out where he has gone wrong when using a calculator to get his answer.

 

Implied parentheses are there wheter I denote them or not. You divide what is on the top by what is on the bottom and that is that. You take 2(3) as already worked out as 6 because it is implied by the nature of 2(3). 6/6 = 1

 

Good night.

 

 

Conclusive proof and feel free to try and blah blah blah your way round it. Wolfram Alpha, the computational engine created by people with far more intelligence than the combined minds seen on this thread.

 

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=6%2F2%281%2B2%29

 

[Smack]

To be honest I can't see how to link it to the sum. I can understand the merit in trying to explain it in a real life context but can't see how it makes a difference. The numbers could stand for pints, bananas or any other object. What we do with those pints still relies on the rules of mathematics, more specifically the order of operations rules.

 

Scenario 1

 

I buy 6 pints, that's the six. I buy 1 for me. That's the one. I buy 2 for the friends. That's the 2. I get everyones Mrs one, thats the 2*.

 

Scenario 2

 

I buy 6 pints. The six. Divide them between me and friend. The divided by 2. He gets 1 more. The one. I get 2 more. The two.

 

I accept the very real possibility of an elementary blunder in my calculations, but that seems real to me. I just don't see the case for multiplying the initial 3 we got by the later 3 we jointly consumed other than to calculate the total consumption. I'm no whizzkid and I would be happy to be put right.

[Das Root]

Scenario 1

 

I buy 6 pints, that's the six. I buy 1 for me. That's the one. I buy 2 for the friends. That's the 2. I get everyones Mrs one, thats the 2*.

 

Scenario 2

 

I buy 6 pints. The six. Divide them between me and friend. The divided by 2. He gets 1 more. The one. I get 2 more. The two.

 

I accept the very real possibility of an elementary blunder in my calculations, but that seems real to me. I just don't see the case for multiplying the initial 3 we got by the later 3 we jointly consumed other than to calculate the total consumption. I'm no whizzkid and I would be happy to be put right.

 

 

See above. And you're welcome

[Budgie.]

Conclusive proof and feel free to try and blah blah blah your way round it. Wolfram Alpha, the computational engine created by people with far more intelligence than the combined minds seen on this thread.

 

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=6%2F2%281%2B2%29

 

 

 

That's NUMBERWANG!!!!

 

Hard lines, better luck next time "1" s.

 

Splendid work Das!

[P-Dizzle]

According to google, "implied parentheses" can only exist where the sum is expressed as a fraction.

 

This isn't a fraction.

 

Ergo, your argument is dead in the water!

 

Again, it holds no relevance to the discussion. A fraction or and division, whether you're using an obelus or a forward slash matters not. It is a division between the number before division and the numbers after the division. That complies with every mathematical principle you can google up.

 

My argument isn't based on implied parentheses anyway, I only brought it up to help answer your ever expanding tautology as previously stated. Or should I stop using big words that are beyond your comprehension even after a google search? :rofl:

[P-Dizzle]

Conclusive proof and feel free to try and blah blah blah your way round it. Wolfram Alpha, the computational engine created by people with far more intelligence than the combined minds seen on this thread.

 

http://www.wolframal...%2F2%281%2B2%29

 

 

I don't care who it was created by, if the data input is wrong then it will give an incorrect answer. The computer is unable to distinguish between the two lines of division. There is no compromise required on my part to get that thing to give a correct answer, you just need to put the data in correctly so the computer can understand. This is where the ambiguity lies, which you deny for some reason, because a computer cannot distinguish that observable flaw in your date input.

 

Just like I can go -

 

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28%286%29%2F%282%281%2B2%29%29

 

But I already know your retort to that link, and I have already answered the problem with your complaint about it.

[southside1874]

To be honest I can't see how to link it to the sum. I can understand the merit in trying to explain it in a real life context but can't see how it makes a difference. The numbers could stand for pints, bananas or any other object. What we do with those pints still relies on the rules of mathematics, more specifically the order of operations rules.

 

So what do the rules of mathematics actually resolve in real life then? Its like you are telling me that the thoughts of Richie the Hibby are correct

[Budgie.]

Again, it holds no relevance to the discussion. A fraction of and division, whether you're using an obelus or a forward slash matters not. It is a division between the number before division and the numbers after the division. That complies with every mathematical principle you can google up.

 

My argument isn't based on implied parentheses anyway, I only brought it up to help answer your ever expanding tautology as previously stated. Or should I stop using big words that are beyond your comprehension even after a google search? :rofl:

 

Say whichever words you like bud.

 

It doesn't matter the length because thanks to Das we have proof that you are wrong that even you can't deny.

 

Here's some short words to describe your argument:

wrong, false, inexact, awry, amiss, askew

 

And some longer words (as I know how much you like them):

Misguided, erroneous, ungrounded, unsubstantial, counterfactual

 

and saving the best for last:

preposterous!

 

[Das Root]

I don't care who it was created by, if the data input is wrong then it will give an incorrect answer. The computer is unable to distinguish between the two lines of division. There is no compromise required on my part to get that thing to give a correct answer, you just need to put the data in correctly so the computer can understand. This is where the ambiguity lies, which you deny for some reason, because a computer cannot distinguish that observable flaw in your date input.

 

Just like I can go -

 

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28%286%29%2F%282%281%2B2%29%29

 

But I already know your retort to that link, and I have already answered the problem with your complaint about it.

 

 

And do you not think that this mathematical engine would not know about implied parentheses? The equation was laid out exactly as inputed, bar the use of a solidus over an obelus. Honestly kiddo, you need to give this one up. "I don't care who it was created by"...people who would be p*ssing themselves at your attempt to keep this thread going, that's who. It's getting embarrassing now, I really think you need to go to bed and rest your noggin

[Das Root]

So what do the rules of mathematics actually resolve in real life then? Its like you are telling me that the thoughts of Richie the Hibby are correct

 

 

What has that got to do with anything? Do you even understand what we are arguing about?

[southside1874]

Say whichever words you like bud.

 

It doesn't matter the length because thanks to Das we have proof that you are wrong that even you can't deny.

 

Here's some short words to describe your argument:

wrong, false, inexact, awry, amiss, askew

 

And some longer words (as I know how much you like them):

Misguided, erroneous, ungrounded, unsubstantial, counterfactual

 

and saving the best for last:

preposterous!

 

 

 

No wonder that the banking crisis happened if 1 can turn into 9 because "daz" said

[P-Dizzle]

Say whichever words you like bud.

 

It doesn't matter the length because thanks to Das we have proof that you are wrong that even you can't deny.

 

Here's some short words to describe your argument:

wrong, false, inexact, awry, amiss, askew

 

And some longer words (as I know how much you like them):

Misguided, erroneous, ungrounded, unsubstantial, counterfactual

 

and saving the best for last:

preposterous!

 

 

 

 

 

None of which back up your argument, but well done for googling 'wrong thesaurus'.

 

 

[modedit]

 

:keys:

[Smack]

All I know is that if I get a round of six pints in, nobody is getting 9.

[P-Dizzle]

And do you not think that this mathematical engine would not know about implied parentheses? The equation was laid out exactly as inputed, bar the use of a solidus over an obelus. Honestly kiddo, you need to give this one up. "I don't care who it was created by"...people who would be p*ssing themselves at your attempt to keep this thread going, that's who. It's getting embarrassing now, I really think you need to go to bed and rest your noggin

 

But I've used the exact same logic as yourself when inputting my data as yourself, I've just made sure that the computer is made aware of the observable truth that we can see in the sum that is indistinguishable for the computer. You do follow that I hope, and then you understand where the issue of ambiguity arises when trying to back up your claim with calculators, because your data entry is flawed. It doesn't matter if you've put that in to google or whatever program you're using, the data is wrong and incomprehensible for the computer.

[Budgie.]

So what do the rules of mathematics actually resolve in real life then? Its like you are telling me that the thoughts of Richie the Hibby are correct

 

They solve lots of things and are used in many professions.

 

Using your beer example:

 

I buy one pint and then two more (1+2) and sit these 3 beers on the table.

 

I then buy 6 beers and drink half of them (divide by two) and place the remaining three beers on the table next to the other 3.

 

The last part of the sum is to multiply the two sets of three pints which gives me nine pints. (this is where your context is unrealistic as you can't multiply pints by pints. If I could it'd save me a load of money next time I buy a round!)

[southside1874]

What has that got to do with anything? Do you even understand what we are arguing about?

I don't see any argument here. Just some nonsense really. Only misguided folk feel the need to argue.

[Smack]

They solve lots of things and are used in many professions.

 

Using your beer example:

 

I buy one pint and then two more (1+2) and sit these 3 beers on the table.

 

I then buy 6 beers and drink half of them (divide by two) and place the remaining three beers on the table next to the other 3.

 

The last part of the sum is to multiply the two sets of three pints which gives me nine pints. (this is where your context is unrealistic as you can't multiply pints by pints. If I could it'd save me a load of money next time I buy a round!)

 

That gives you 6 pints and 3 empties. Just because you have three beers sitting next to three beers doesn't mean you can multiply them. Not even if you are blitzed.

[P-Dizzle]

Anyway, I'm off to bed. I'll respond in the morning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/2(1+2)

6/2(3) (or 6/6, same thing because 2(3) = 6 no need to wait until division to multiply because it's already implied by the brackets)

1

[Budgie.]

That gives you 6 pints and 3 empties. Just because you have three beers sitting next to three beers doesn't mean you can multiply them. Not even if you are blitzed.

 

Which is why your context just doesn't work.

 

Your context cannot give you 9 (or 1)

[Das Root]

But I've used the exact same logic as yourself when inputting my data as yourself, I've just made sure that the computer is made aware of the observable truth that we can see in the sum that is indistinguishable for the computer. You do follow that I hope, and then you understand where the issue of ambiguity arises when trying to back up your claim with calculators, because your data entry is flawed. It doesn't matter if you've put that in to google or whatever program you're using, the data is wrong and incomprehensible for the computer.

 

 

 

Show me evidence to back up your claim that it is the de facto case that implied parenthesis need added to this equation. Less jabber, more proofs. It's all really been what you say, and I'm afraid that means very little to me in providing conclusive proof of the answer.

 

And why would a system that is designed to be used by mathematicians and scientists need you to add a few brackets so it knows what it's meant to do? Basic logic would dictate that it knows everything required regarding mathematical equations and is therefore applying this to come to the correct result from the correctly inputted equation that matches the original question. Even with the use of a solidus (fractional bar) over an obelus (division sign), the answer is still NINE.

 

And another thing, if the answer was so ambiguious, why is it only providing one result? Why not..."well it could either be 1 or 9 and here is why".

 

Wolfram|Alpha introduces a fundamentally new way to get knowledge and answers?

not by searching the web, but by doing dynamic computations based on a vast collection of built-in data, algorithms, and methods.

 

It pisses all over Google. And indeed your flawed logic

[Das Root]

That gives you 6 pints and 3 empties. Just because you have three beers sitting next to three beers doesn't mean you can multiply them. Not even if you are blitzed.

 

 

I normally use a 24 pack of Peroni when I'm calculating my equations. That's where you went wrong.

[Budgie.]

Show me evidence to back up your claim that it is the de facto case that implied parenthesis need added to this equation. Less jabber, more proofs. It's all really been what you say, and I'm afraid that means very little to me in providing conclusive proof of the answer.

 

And why would a system that is designed to be used by mathematicians and scientists need you to add a few brackets so it knows what it's meant to do? Basic logic would dictate that it knows everything required regarding mathematical equations and is therefore applying this to come to the correct result from the correctly inputted equation that matches the original question. Even with the use of a solidus (fractional bar) over an obelus (division sign), the answer is still NINE.

 

And another thing, if the answer was so ambiguious, why is it only providing one result? Why not..."well it could either be 1 or 9 and here is why".

 

 

 

It pisses all over Google. And indeed your flawed logic

 

You're wasting your time mate.

 

"you can drag a horse to water but you can't make it drink!"

[Smack]

Which is why your context just doesn't work.

 

Your context cannot give you 9 (or 1)

 

It does work.

 

Buy 6 pints. Divide them amongst me and my two friends and their wives. (1+2)*2. 1 pint each.

 

No theoretical beer unlike your example, just one, cool, delicious pint each. It has to work in real life. Your example doesn't.

[Smack]

I normally use a 24 pack of Peroni when I'm calculating my equations. That's where you went wrong.

 

It's not an equation. It's just basic, real world division, or sharing as it was introduced to me as a 9 yr old.

[Das Root]

It's not an equation. It's just basic, real world division, or sharing as it was introduced to me as a 9 yr old.

 

 

Erm, ok.

[Smack]

Erm, ok.

 

Erm,ok. = I have no answer for that

[Budgie.]

It's not an equation. It's just basic, real world division, or sharing as it was introduced to me as a 9 yr old.

 

You should sue your school bud. You should have been introduced to it as a 6 year old.

[Smack]

You should sue your school bud. You should have been introduced to it as a 6 year old.

 

Care to supply some reasoning or perhaps even a counter argument to my statement?

[Smack]

You should sue your school bud. You should have been introduced to it as a 6 year old.

 

Oh!! Wait. I'm getting hot under the collar. That was conciliatory. Gotta love Maths. The Mrs could ride the boy from Kenya next door and I wouldn't get so upset.

[Budgie.]

For those just joining this thread I'll save you the bother of reading through all ten pages. Here is a summary of the thread expressed in the form of a swordfight between the 'white 9 knights' and the spirited (yet woefully unsuccessful) 'black 1 knights'

 

 

 

 

 

[Das Root]

Erm,ok. = I have no answer for that

 

 

Exactly what I was trying to imply, so in this case your equation is completely correct.

[Smack]

I'd be happy to let all those in the nine camp buy a round. You buy your 9, i'll get 1 each, 6.

[Budgie.]

Oh!! Wait. I'm getting hot under the collar. That was conciliatory. Gotta love Maths. The Mrs could ride the boy from Kenya next door and I wouldn't get so upset.

 

[Smack]

Exactly what I was trying to imply, so in this case your equation is completely correct.

 

In that case I'm claiming victory. Why? I don't know. I don't even care. Fills the time i suppose. Ah well, I'm off to bed, don't fancy my chances of any action unless i can convince the Mrs that one pint is nine.

[Vlad-Stupid]

This thread is everlasting. I think it is referred to as the ultimate maths question as it's ambiguous nature means it has two answers 1 & 9. I think the way the question is written is a load of pish ergo there can not be a definitive answer.

Should it not be written correctly as (6/2)(2(1+2)) or written as a fraction?(can't example as on iPhone)

 

On the scientific calculator:

 

6/2(2+1)=1

6/2*(2+1)=9

 

I think the question was designed by skynet to crash the Internet and begin judgement day

[Statto]

Can any of the "one-ers" provide a website link as evidence to support their claims that the "2" is attached to the "(1+2)" and/or there is implied brackets around the "2(1+2)".

 

I'd like to see this evidence please.

 

[Chaka Demus & pliers]

I just put this into 6 different scientific calculators, exactly as it appears in the OP. They were all downloaded from the android market.

 

Two gave the answer as 9.

One gave the answer as 1.

Three would not perform the calculation with one of them stating 'invalid expression' while the other two would not accept brackets after the 2 at all

 

My conclusion is that this has deliberately been written to cause arguments on internet forums and messageboards.

[I P Knightley]

Kevan plays an ABSALUTE BLINDER at 02:30. Must be in a different time zone as not even my most cleverest friends are that clever at that time of the night.

 

Question to Das Root. When you earlier wrote 'us mathematicians', what level of mathematics study/qualification are you talking about? Nothing sinister in here about trying to undermine your argument; just intrigue from one mathematician (B.Sc Hons w distiction, in the spirit of sharing) to another.

 

One thing for sure - in 4 years of degree study, none of the professors or tutors I encountered bothered themselves with arithmetic in the way the OP starts. They were much too concerned with imaginary numbers and other worthy disciplines.

 

Did anyone yet mention that BEDMAS and BEMDAS are used interchangably?

 

None of this thread resolves the fact that my train is stuck between stations and I'm going to be late.

[Mid Calder Jambo]

As I said earlier this is one of the best threads for ages. How some of you guys can put reasonable arguments together at 2 and 3 in the morning, I doff my cap to you. It changes nothing though, the answer is still 1. The number 2 is still attached to the brackets and the whole lot after the division sign is divided into the six.

 

Remember that that world record thread we were after..............................................................................................

[Hansel]

It's 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

O'clock

[Nobreath]

This thread is everlasting. I think it is referred to as the ultimate maths question as it's ambiguous nature means it has two answers 1 & 9. I think the way the question is written is a load of pish ergo there can not be a definitive answer.

Should it not be written correctly as (6/2)(2(1+2)) or written as a fraction?(can't example as on iPhone)

 

On the scientific calculator:

 

6/2(2+1)=1

6/2*(2+1)=9

 

I think the question was designed by skynet to crash the Internet and begin judgement day

 

This sounds about right, but I prefer watching the pseudo mathamaticians having girlie fights.

[Arnold Rothstein]

The answer is 1.

 

For those in the 9 camp, why are you doing the sum in the brackets and then leaving it as 2(3)? This is incomplete. This must be completed in order to continue with the sum.

[Mid Calder Jambo]

The answer is 1.

 

For those in the 9 camp, why are you doing the sum in the brackets and then leaving it as 2(3)? This is incomplete. This must be completed in order to continue with the sum.

 

Another way of explaining it and still correct

[kingantti1874]

Its 1 - The only number that applies to the backet is the 2 because the 6 is before the division.

 

If the answer is 9 the equation would have to be (6\2)(1+2) = 9

[Currahee!]

When I do it in my head the answer is 9.

 

when I wrote it down I can get 1.

 

I'm going for 9 though.

[BoJack Horseman]

There are some absolute strokers in this thread.

 

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293