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
beast (22h) : Seems like he was just pissed because he was no longer the starter
beast (22h) : 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
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : oh lol
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I have a script that purges them now.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : 118 Topics with Message.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : what's 118 (besides a number)?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : They got 118 slapped in there.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : that's why it confused the hell out of me
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, but this is taking a headline and slapping it into the Packers Talk
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Wasnt there a time guests could post in the help forum?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : lol good question, kind of impressed!
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : So how is a guest posting?
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Tell them its an emergency
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Working. Meetings.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Lots of fun; the spam goes back 4 or 5 pages by this point
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I thought you'd look for yourself and put 2 and 2 together lol. I overestimated ya ;)
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I thought Guests couldnt post?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : And gosh that's gonna be fun to clean up! hahaa
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Oh. Why not just say that then? Geez.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : check the main forum, seems a spam bot is running amok
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : What?
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Is the Packers online game "Packers Predict" now available for 2024? I can't tell
Zero2Cool (17-Feb) : Bengals planning to Franchise Tag Tamaurice Higgins
Zero2Cool (14-Feb) : Packers are hiring Luke Getsy as senior offensive assistant.
Martha Careful (12-Feb) : I would love to have them both, esp. Crosby, but either might be too expensive.
Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : Keisean Nixon is trying to get Maxx Crosby and Davante Adams lol
Mucky Tundra (11-Feb) : Yeah where did it go?
packerfanoutwest (11-Feb) : or did you resctrict access to that 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
12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Feb / Around The NFL / beast

16-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Feb / Around The NFL / beast

15-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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