Poll: 6÷2(1+2)
- Thread starter Barks
- Start date
You see, the problem with that is that you've included spaces which weren't in the original equation which makes it what you want it to be
I included spaces to spread it and make it easier to read, but they don't mean anything. If it were written 6÷2(1+2), you should still come to the same conclusion.
ahh, you make a very good point there
Personally i still think the answer is 9 but can see how people end up getting 1
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,807
- Location
- State of Volatile Apathy
And the cycle returns...
I'm afraid there is a right and wrong answer. It's fairly clear which is the accepted priority here. At least it was in the 70's when I was at school.
I'll admit that I skipped about 12 pages here but surely we've all been to school?
I'm going to sound like I'm up my own bumhole but I have a 2:1 in maths (although it was 7 years ago) and I say there isn't.
The issue arises with 2(1+2).
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,807
- Location
- State of Volatile Apathy
Well basically all of this has been covered multiple times, but the 'ground rules' applied in primary/secondary school for the ease of young minds negotiating mathematics aren't universally applicable and those that have experienced third level education or even professions in mathematics have said that the equation can be legimately interpreted in two ways.
As far as I'm concerned there is no right or wrong answer.
Another way of looking at it would be how it'd appear on an exam paper, though that's probably been mentioned. Converting from a fraction format to a line format shows, again, that the structure suggests the answer is 1:
6(1+2) = (6÷2)(1+2) or 6(1+2)÷2 = 9
2
6____ = 6÷2(1+2) = 1
2(1+2)
If the original equation were given to represent the first instance, there's no way it'd make it onto a final paper draft, barring gross negligence on the part of the exam board. Seeing the amount of people who'd answer 1 when the intended answer was 9 would revise an instant rewrite of that question.
Edit: Post formatting doesn't really allow for the extended fraction divisor in the second example.
Edit 2: fixed it.
6(1+2) = (6÷2)(1+2) or 6(1+2)÷2 = 9
2
6____ = 6÷2(1+2) = 1
2(1+2)
If the original equation were given to represent the first instance, there's no way it'd make it onto a final paper draft, barring gross negligence on the part of the exam board. Seeing the amount of people who'd answer 1 when the intended answer was 9 would revise an instant rewrite of that question.
Edit: Post formatting doesn't really allow for the extended fraction divisor in the second example.
Edit 2: fixed it.
Oh right, another one of those fluffy modern ideas that no-one can be wrong (no offense intended)?
It's all down to numerical precedence surely? You can't suddenly change the 'rules' overnight. So, based on teachings in the 70's and 80's the equation would reduce to 3(3) which is 9.
I can see how 1 can be the answer but that's only possible if the accepted order of precedence is changed compared to the accepted standards of the past.
Surely if they wanted it like the first example they'd write it:
6
-- (1+2)
2
If you get the drift of my formatting.
Did resolving the brackets not take precedence in the 70s?
Edit:
I get ye, but I formatted it wrong - the line equation was the format in question, and should have gone first in my post. Your display is exactly the same as mine, only shown better, but they both lead to the same line equation, qhereas yours cannot be analogous to my second fraction equation.
Last edited:
Did resolving the brackets not take precedence in the 70s?
Yeah so that gives you 6÷2x3 and you work from there
Did resolving the brackets not take precedence in the 70s?
Edit:
I get ye, but I formatted it wrong - the line equation was the format in question, and should have gone first in my post. Your display is exactly the same as mine, only shown better, but they both lead to the same line equation, qhereas yours cannot be analogous to my second fraction equation.
Yes.. resolve the contents of the bracket first. This results in 3(3) whcih equals 9.
Orite, frainfart - yeah, it does give 9 in that process. I see the confusion a lot easier now - weaker arguement for 1, stronger arguement for 9. I'd still put 1 on an exam paper, though.
Edit: no, that's not confusing at all. The bracket function is 2(1+2), not just (1+2). If the equation were written 6÷2x(1+2) I'd put 9 no question, but the 2 is a coefficient and not a multiple.
No. You follow mathematic rules which results in 3(3). There is no ambiguity in interpretation due to previous calculations.