Zero2Cool
13 years ago
What the hell?
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
13 years ago

..By the way, I forwarded the question to the members of my department...I'll let you know what the answer(s) they give are. :)

"vikesrule" wrote:



That is some funny stuff right there Wade.....economics geeks and real math.
Bwaahaaaa :onfloor:

"Wade" wrote:



I'll have you know, most of my department are neither, instead being accountants and management professors.

And I am *not* a geek. I'm a nerd and a flake.

Be precise.

:)
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
13 years ago

..By the way, I forwarded the question to the members of my department...I'll let you know what the answer(s) they give are. :)

"Wade" wrote:



That is some funny stuff right there Wade.....economics geeks and real math.
Bwaahaaaa :onfloor:

"vikesrule" wrote:



I'll have you know, most of my department are neither, instead being accountants and management professors.

And I am *not* a geek. I'm a nerd and a flake.

Be precise
.

:)

"Wade" wrote:



I love it. kudos 4 you

Crap. I will never catch you in that area if I keep giving you the love. :thumbleft:
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
13 years ago
2+2=4 X2 =8
UserPostedImage
GermanGilbert
13 years ago

2+2=4 X2 =8

"Cheesey" wrote:



good try, but failed nonetheless, alan ;)

there's a special number to do the math (Y in that case) by the way.

X = any number you want to choose
Y = number of vince lombardi trophies in the vikings trophy case

X+Y=X
X-Y=X
XxY=Y
X/Y=not defined

which number is Y? :wickedfart: 😉
blank
djcubez
13 years ago
Tough one Gilbert.

X + Y = X - Y. Hmmm.
X * Y = Y. Wtf?

I'm gonna say Y = 0 xD

A similar problem actually came up on my Facebook the other day in one of those new polls they have. I was surprised how many people got it wrong. It was a ratio of about 6:2.5 with the majority getting it right. However, there was about ten-to-a-hundred thousand votes cast (from what I remember). I never thought that order of operations was that difficult to understand.

EDIT: I found the Facebook poll. Kind of astonishing the ratio is A LOT closer than I remembered:

6 / 2 (1 + 2) = ?

1 - 1,546,659 votes
9 - 1,996,151 votes

It's obviously 9:

1 + 2 = 3: 6 / 2 (3) = ?
6 / 2 = 3: 3(3) = ?
3 * 3 = 9

People get 1 because they do the parentheses first, which is right (look at my first step). But then they distribute the 2 into the parentheses before dividing the six by it. This is the wrong way:

1 + 2 - 3: 6 / 2 (3) = ?
2 * 3 = 6: 6 / 6 = ?
6 / 6 = 1

Another way is people might be distributing the 2 early and then adding it:

2 * 2 = 4; 2 * 1 = 2: 6 / (4 + 2) = ?
4 + 2 = 6: 6 / (6) = ?
6 / 6 = 1

However you don't distribute the number into the parentheses unless there's variables. As VR said, you got to use that PEMDAS. Once you do what's in the parentheses you start over from left to right and do multiplication/division. After that you start over from left to right and do addition/subtraction.

EDIT: Found some other guy's explanation if anyone's interested. Apparently this is why people get it wrong:


Team 9: THE ANSWER IS 9
Those who argue that the answer is 9 follow standard order of operations:
6/2(1+2)
First you do whatever is in the parentheses which is (1+2):
6/2(3)
Next, you do multiplication and division in order from left to right, so you devide 6 by 2 and then multiply the result by 3. The parentheses are not needed as 2(3) only indicates 2x3:
3(3) = 9

Team 1: THE ANSWER IS 1
Those who argue that the answer is 1 follow order of operations, but accept that multiplication by juxtaposition indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations:
6/2(1+2)
First you do whatever is in the parentheses which is (1+2):
6/2(3)
Next you must do 2(3) because multiplying by just putting things next to each other (multiplication by juxtaposition), rather than using the "x" sign indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before other operations.
6/6 = 1

As I have demonstrated here both answers can be argued for and the problem lies with what your view on multiplication by juxtaposition is:
Whether or not you believe 6/2(3) is different than 6/2x(3)
From what Ive been able to find, there is no definitive answer or consensus on this matter (even different calculators will calculate them differently), Therefore it is up to the one writing the expression to clearly indicate what he means without any ambiguity by writing:

6/2x(1+2) or 6/(2(1+2))

In conclusion I would like to state that the person who wrote the expression 6/2(1+2) is an absolute dick-headed moron who does not know how to make it clear what he means and just likes pissing people off. Learn some math fool!



That makes complete sense to me. I still vote for 9 though because I only multiply through the parentheses when there's a variable present.
longtimefan
13 years ago
20 years ago, it would been 8...New math makes it 6
dhpackr
13 years ago



Team 1: THE ANSWER IS 1
Those who argue that the answer is 1 follow order of operations, but accept that multiplication by juxtaposition indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations:
6/2(1+2)
First you do whatever is in the parentheses which is (1+2):
6/2(3)
Next you must do 2(3) because multiplying by just putting things next to each other (multiplication by juxtaposition), rather than using the "x" sign indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before other operations.
6/6 = 1

"djcubez" wrote:



IMHO, and I aced two semesters of college algebra and am about to take calculus, 1 is the answer.

i see the problem as

6/2(1+2) =

6

2(1+2)


6
------- =
2(3)

6
-----=
6

1
So if you meet me Have some courtesy, Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse, Or I'll lay your soul to waste
dhpackr
13 years ago

20 years ago, it would been 8...New math makes it 6

"longtimefan" wrote:



(ur+1)
So if you meet me Have some courtesy, Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse, Or I'll lay your soul to waste
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

20 years ago, it would been 8...New math makes it 6

"dhpackr" wrote:



(urSlapnuts)

"longtimefan" wrote:


lmao
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (14h) : Good deal too
Martha Careful (15h) : Maxx Crosby resigned by Raiders
Zero2Cool (6-Mar) : Chargers release Joey Bosa
Zero2Cool (4-Mar) : Appears Jets released Adams. It'll be official in few hours.
Zero2Cool (3-Mar) : We have re-signed LB Isaiah McDuffie
Zero2Cool (2-Mar) : Jets taking calls for Davante Adams. That $38m cap number hurting lol
Zero2Cool (2-Mar) : Guess it's not official until the 12th
Zero2Cool (2-Mar) : Deebo went for a 5th to Commanders?
Martha Careful (1-Mar) : Just like my late husband!!
Zero2Cool (1-Mar) : Once fired up, it should be good
Zero2Cool (1-Mar) : Sometimes, the first page load will be slow. it's firing up the site.
Martha Careful (1-Mar) : The site is operating much faster...tyvm
Mucky Tundra (28-Feb) : It's the offseason and the draft is still nearly 2 months away, what can ya do?🤷‍♂️
Zero2Cool (27-Feb) : NFL teams were notified today that the 2025 salary cap has been set at $279,200,000 per club.
Zero2Cool (27-Feb) : sssllllooooow
Martha Careful (27-Feb) : is it just me, or has the website been slow the last couple of days?
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Damnit 2026 2nd rnd pick!
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Packers get Myles Garret and Browns 2926 2nd rnd pick.
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Browns get Jaire, + Packers #1 2025 pick and 2026 3rd rnd pick.
beast (26-Feb) : Rams trying to trade Stafford and Kupp, then signing Rodgers and Adams? Just speculation, but interesting
Zero2Cool (26-Feb) : Packers shopping Jaire Alexander per Ian Rapoport
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst and Jaire Alexander’s agent, John Thornton, are meeting this week in Indianapolis to determine the future of the Packers’ 28-year-
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst says Mark Murphy told him he can trade their first-round pick despite the draft being in Green Bay.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : Packers. 🤦
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team petition NFL to ban Brotherly Shove.
beast (23-Feb) : Seems like he was just pissed because he was no longer the starter
beast (23-Feb) : Campbell is right, he's rich and he doesn't have to explain sh!t... but that attitude gives teams reasons to never sign him again.
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I have some doubt about all that
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I read De'Vondre Campbell's tweet this morning (via the New York Post) Florio says that if he invested his earnings wisely, he will be good
beast (20-Feb) : I haven't followed, but I believe he's good when healthy, just hasn't been able to stay healthy.
dfosterf (20-Feb) : Hasn"t Bosa missed more games than he has played in the last 3 years?
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : He hasn't been too bad when healthy but I don't feel like I ever heard much about when he is
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Felt like he was more interested in his body, than football. He flashed more than I expected
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : When he was coming out, I thought he'd be flash in pan.
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : Joey seems so forgettable compared to his brother for some reason
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : NFL informed teams today that the 2025 salary cap will be roughly $277.5M-$281.5M
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Los Angeles Chargers are likely to release DE Joey Bosa this off-season as a cap casualty, per league source.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : If the exploit is not fixed, we'll see tons of "50 top free agents, 50 perfect NFL team fits: We picked where each should sign in March" lo
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Issue should be solved, database cleaned and held strong working / meeting. Boom!
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : It should be halted now.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : usually spambots are trying to get traffic to shady websites filled with spyware; the two links being spammed were to the Packers website
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : you know when you put it that way combined with the links it was spamming (to the official Packers website)
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yep. You can do that with holding down ENTER on a command in Console of browser
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : even with the rapid fire posts?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I'm not certain it's a bot.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I've got to go to work soon which is a pity because I'm enthralled by this battle between the bot and Zero
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, I see what that did. Kind of funny.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : now it's a link to Wes Hodkiezwicz mailbag
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Now they're back with another topic
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

5-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

4-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

3-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

1-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

1-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

28-Feb / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

27-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.