No, because the (4 + 8) [+] 2 x 5, the [+] is not attached to the brackets So in your question brackets come first (12) + 2 x 5 Then 2 x 5 = 10 Then (12) + 10 = 22 It seems when you did it yourself you multiplied 12 by 2 then added 5, which was not the format of your question. A number attached to a bracket means multiply 2(8) = 16
But you aren't finished with the brackets once you have worked out the answer inside. I'll rewrite the question how it should be written 48/[2x(9+3)] 48 is on top of the equation and the whole 2(9+3) is on the bottom of the equation like a fraction. So 48 never gets multiplied by anything.
I've heard it said that mathematics is an exact science (or art, or whatever ) so how come we have here, the possibility of different results? Obviously there is something terribly wrong with the syntax. It's not the equation or expression that is at fault. It's the presentation that is causing all the confusion. Therefore, I can only draw the conclusion that wilfredlgf is up to some nefarious and dark trick, attempting to warp the fabric of space-time without getting clearance from ground control sitting up there in the Control Tower. P.S. If you can get 2 different answers from an equation, surely I am allowed to mix/mash metaphors?
Mathematics is a science, there are very few equations where you can have 2 correct answers, most of them are algebraic or the squareroot of a number can be positive or negative. What we have with this expression is a group of people that have learned some part of maths but not the context in which it is used. BODMAS seems to be getting quoted a lot but people aren't fully obeying it. The expression is fine and I think 100% of people would be able to get it right if it was written more clearly, I'll attempt it below. (...) is just to prevent the the 48 moving position. ......48....... 2 x ( 9 + 3 )
Wow - this thread has had quite a few replies and ignited a nice debate. Part of me is wondering when the flame war will begin, though... I have a proof of 2 = 1 if the O/P's question loses momentum.
...since every individual here is a math wiz instead of a math wuss, probably the math weasel could have written it as 48/(2(9 + 3)) to avoid confusion. ...the debate will never end because it is structured incorrectly. ...the guy who wrote this is even printing and selling t-shirts for this ambiguous equation. ...maybe i'll write something and post it on the net and somehow it'll find its way HERE.
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293 : "48÷2(9+3) = ? is a math problem that, depending on the order of operations used, leads to two different answers: 2 and 288. It can be a hot topic for debate, and is sometimes used to troll other users because of the argument that can result afterward." So it's basically trolling.
Now, what I hazily remember from high school is that curly brackets take precedence over square brackets take precedence over round (or plain vanilla) brackets. Want to go to the *ahem* polls for this?
48÷2(9+3)=48÷(9+3)2 isn't it? only way for them to be equal is to treat 2(9+3) and (9+3)2 as a single term by itself
if you really want a really bad answer: solve the 2(9+3) first 48 ÷ 2*9 + 2*3 48 ÷ 18 + 6 (division first) 2.667 + 6 = 8.667 lol.. (I know it's pretty wrong) I still believe the answer is 2
work from left to right or right to left? I'm not so sure to say that he didn't write the question with care. Formula should be read and done in the sequence of left to right, no? 288 should be the correct answer in this case. I agree that most of us would have got straight to the bracket first then work the formula backward from right to left, hence coming up with the answer 2. If I were an engineer, I could have blown up the world already.
