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: šŸ˜‰
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
Martha Careful (6h) : Two terrific NCAA Football Semi-Final Games...We can only hope the Championship game is as good
Zero2Cool (10-Jan) : Eagles WR DeVonta Smith will be a DNP in todayā€™s practice. Heā€™s dealing with back tightness. But the expectation is that heā€™ll play Sunday.
Zero2Cool (10-Jan) : Jalen Hurts has cleared the concussion protocol. Heā€™s playing Sunday.
Zero2Cool (10-Jan) : š•avier McKinney First Team All-Pro
Zero2Cool (10-Jan) : NFL moves Vikings-Rams playoff tilt to Arizona due to fires
Zero2Cool (10-Jan) : Rams lose home field advantage for Monday game.
Mucky Tundra (9-Jan) : Notre Lame=Notre Dame, Luckeyes=Ohio State, Pedo St=Penn St
Zero2Cool (9-Jan) : ... It clearly was not what we were supposed to be in, certainly."
Zero2Cool (9-Jan) : Hafley says 3rd and 11 call there was a miscommunication.
Zero2Cool (9-Jan) : The only team I know is Texas from that. Who are the other three?
Mucky Tundra (9-Jan) : Notre Lame vs Pedo St tonight and the Luckeyes vs Texas tomorrow
Mucky Tundra (9-Jan) : Stud
Zero2Cool (9-Jan) : E. Cooper. Rookie of Month. Defense.
Mucky Tundra (8-Jan) : @AaronNagler Ā· 2m Both Jordan Love and Malik Willis were Limited participants at Packers practice today.
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : Johnson didn't make it until 2020. Ring 2023. šŸ¤· Personally, he should have been in years prior to Hall.
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : HUMP DAY
beast (8-Jan) : Guys that have a good shot at making the NFL Hall of Fame usually get into their teams pretty fast
beast (8-Jan) : Yeah, but is Kampman and the others in the NFL Hall of Fame?
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : Johnson was Hall of Fame, 2020. Should haev been in Ring a year later, not three years.
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : I could be wrong there though
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : Guys like Kampman, Tim Harris, Al Harris, etc all over 15 years. Hall of Fame is 5 year wait
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : I guess I see players in Packers Hall come way later
beast (8-Jan) : Yeah, usually teams hall of fames are a much lower bar than the NFL
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : is it uncommon for Hall before Ring?
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : S Xavier McKinney named first-team All-Pro by NFLPA
beast (8-Jan) : I missed it, sorry, but he got into the NFL Hall of Fame years before that
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : Jones took his sweet ole time!
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : Yeah, he's in the ring of honor, just saw video and his name is up there
Zero2Cool (8-Jan) : Didn't they have a thing in 2023 for Jimmy's ring of honor? I swear I saw it
beast (8-Jan) : Though if they're legitimately trying to re-sign MM, then it makes sense.
beast (8-Jan) : Jerry Jones still hasn't put Jimmy Johnson in the Ring of Honor, but he's in the NFL's Hall of Fame, Jones is petty
Mucky Tundra (8-Jan) : Unless the Cowboys are planning an extension, seems kinda petty
beast (8-Jan) : Cowboys denied Bears request
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : From what I'm reading, MM is under contract through the 14th of January; after that he's free game
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : McCarthy let go or not extended??
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Chicago Bears have asked the Dallas Cowboys permission to interview Mike McCarthy for head coaching vacancy
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : The winners page that is
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : I was not hoping for that. It messes up the page lol
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3.
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3.
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : congrats beast on 2024 !
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : congrats porky on winning 2023 pick'em! (oops sorry)
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : Packers have $60M+ of 2025 cap space on paper TODAY.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Missed FG into a Lions TD; that'll do pig, that'll do
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : That might be it for the Vikings
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Oh so the refs do know what intentional grounding is
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : what the hell was that Goff?! Not much pressure and he just air mails it to Harrison
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : They really need to to get rid of the auto first down for illegal contact
Martha Careful (6-Jan) : watching the Vikings and Lions it's understandable why they swept the Packers. So much better product
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
Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

9-Jan / Around The NFL / beast

9-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

9-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

8-Jan / Around The NFL / beast

7-Jan / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

7-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7-Jan / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright Ā© 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.comā„¢. All Rights Reserved.