FAQ | Register | Login |

6 ÷ 2(1+2)

Completely off the Topic of Tea

6 ÷ 2(1+2)

0
1
2%
1
20
49%
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
20
49%
10
0

6 ÷ 2(1+2)

Bored and found this math question... Lets get back to school... what is the answer for...

6 ÷ 2(1+2)

?

auhckw

Posts: 1664
Joined: May 24th, '
Location: Malaysia

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

auhckw

Posts: 1664
Joined: May 24th, '
Location: Malaysia

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

The answer shown in ImageShack is wrong
In this equation, priority is given to the operation 2(1+2) before 6÷2.
So, the right answer should be 1.

Fabien

Posts: 72
Joined: May 12th, '
Location: Haute-Savoie, France

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

Fabien wrote:The answer shown in ImageShack is wrong
In this equation, priority is given to the operation 2(1+2) before 6÷2.
So, the right answer should be 1.

Sorry but recall the order of operations:

1. Parenthesis
2. Exponents
3. Multiplication/Division which ever occurs first from left to right
4. Addition/Subtraction which ever occurs first from left to right.

so you start by adding (1+2)

and it turns into 6÷2(3).

But then as all that is left is multiplication or division, we look from left to right and 6÷2 goes first turning it into 3 times 3, or 9.

I should say rarely would someone in real life write a problem like that, and problems of that nature are supposed to be intentionally misleading.

Posts: 2373
Joined: Jul 22nd, '
Location: Capital of the Mitten

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

AdamMY wrote:I should say rarely would someone in real life write a problem like that, and problems of that nature are supposed to be intentionally misleading.

Exactly.

Drax

Posts: 2771
Joined: Oct 16th, '
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

You can also think of it fractionally as (6(1+2))/2

bearsbearsbears

Posts: 461
Joined: Jun 15th, '
Location: Lawrenceville, GA

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

I couldn't tell you the last time I saw the ÷ sign in an equation . My initial instinct was 1, but caught myself... tricky tricky

Running for Tea

Posts: 129
Joined: Aug 14th, '
Location: Ohio

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

without those "spaces" around the "÷" it's less tricky
fdrx

Posts: 208
Joined: Sep 2nd, '1

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

As I recall, the order of Operations went.

Dear
Ben
Excuse
My
Dear
Aunt
Sally.

Divide
Bracket
Parenthesis
Exponents
Mutiplication.
Duh....
Ahhhhhh
Sheesh... I'm stupid.

SlientSipper

Posts: 325
Joined: Nov 21st, '

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

Xell
Vendor Member

Posts: 448
Joined: Jan 7th, '1
Location: Japan, Nagasaki

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

I would add that the division symbol confused me initially. Writing it out as fractions clears the ambiguity up; I guess that's why you stop using it once you hit Algebra 1 in high school. fdrx is right in that the spaces around the division symbol don't help clarity at all.

Casualconnoisse...

Posts: 31
Joined: Jul 21st, '
Location: The Frigid North

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

I can't believe that i got it right, much less remembered how to do it, lol.

p_funk

Posts: 31
Joined: May 20th, '

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

Let's keep the ball rolling:

The prize money of \$180 from a competition is to be divided between three children.

Adam won the first prize, Beth won the second prize and Chris won the third prize.

It is decided that the division will be in the ratio of:

1st : 2nd : 3rd = 5 : 3 :1

How much does each child receive?

bagua7

Posts: 1306
Joined: Jul 21st, '

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

If you are going to discuss math, at least ask interesting questions. Such as stuff relating to what I have been working on, but accessible to lay people who want to think logically.

Assuming between two people they either know each other or they do not. What is the smallest group of people you must assemble such that you either have 3 of them which all know each other, or 3 of them that do not know each other?

Similarly, what if we replaced that with either 4 people that all know each other, or 3 people that do not know each other?

(Hint before considering the second question tackle the first).

Posts: 2373
Joined: Jul 22nd, '
Location: Capital of the Mitten

Re: 6 ÷ 2(1+2)

AdamMY wrote:If you are going to discuss math, at least ask interesting questions. Such as stuff relating to what I have been working on, but accessible to lay people who want to think logically.

Assuming between two people they either know each other or they do not. What is the smallest group of people you must assemble such that you either have 3 of them which all know each other, or 3 of them that do not know each other?

I don´t understand how this is possible to answer....if you have any number of people all of them could know each other or none of them could know each other or any number of pairs of people within the group could know each other.

At first I thought the answer was 3...because it´s certainly possible to have a group of 3 that knows each other or a group of 3 that does not know each other but it´s also possible to have a group of 3 in which one person knows both others but they do not know each other or a group of 3 in which two people know each other but neither knows the 3rd person.

If I make the group size 4 then if none of them know each other there are 4 people that do not know each other not 3 people that do not know each other. Any group size greater than 3 has this problem.

A group size less than 3 can´t satisfy the conditions in any case at all since there aren´t 3 people to know or not know each other.

entropyembrace

Posts: 2028
Joined: Mar 3rd, '0

Next

Instant Messenger

Permissions
You cannot post new topics