You mean it's interesting that it inserts a bunch of brackets and symbols which the "it's ambiguous!" crowd have said would be needed for it to equal 9?
Yeah, that is interesting.
Indeed, in programming i would never dream of not parenthesizing terms to be explicitly clear.
In Maths we actually lose marks for not clarifying. A lot of people now use an extreme amount of brackets just to make sure![]()
I know it doesn't matter
But surely as there are brackets and a division sign then you would have this:
6/(division)2(multiplication)(1+(addition)2)(brackets)
Therefore you complete the content of the brackets first: 1+2 = 3
Then you multiply the coefficient of the bracket by the bracket itself (something that my school, sixth form and university teachers have always told us to do, as it is part of the brackets): 2*3 = 6
Then you complete the division: 6/6=1
I understand that the equation is written very ambiguously, but I can't see any other solution
And yes Castiel you are right, I'm just waiting for Mr. Postman to deliver me some prezzies, and this is more fun than playing cod![]()
You really have to, to avoid trolling on such a massive level as the creator of the poll for this on Facebook.
Our resident maths genius (my LSE educated wife) says pretty much the same, as there is nothing separating the brackets from the 2, thus the only answer you can arrive at is 1.
To equal 9, it would read 6/2*(1+2) or something like that.
I run an IT area for an investment bank. Even though I've only been there for about 6 months I jumped at the chance to get involved in their graduate recruitment programme. I really do value the importance of offering people a career and guiding them through their early years to fulfill their potential.
But... over several weeks we interviewed numerous people and nearly everyone who was offered a job at the end of the process was someone from another EU country. I was part of the team deciding on who went through, and the standard from other EU couhtries was not only higher but the commitment shown by the candidates was much higher.
The UK candidates seemed to waltz in, assuming they were king of the hill because they had a degree, and really showed no hunger or desire in life.
It was quite an eye opener I'm afraid.
+1.........it is a nonsense formula designed specifically to confuse.
Ummm... I know that 2(2+2)=8... But you said that the bracket 'function' was 2(2+2)=8
i.e. That this whole lot is first in the order of which part to do first.
So, following that logic, this would mean that 2(2+2) would be the same as 2x2+2 which is 6, which is clearly wrong. Anyone with an idea of how to do maths knows that it's 8, so clearly there is a fault in your idea that the 2 in front of the brackets is included in the bracket. This is where you are going wrong.
I'm enjoying the disparity in the arguments:
Camp 9: It's 9 you uneducated morons! Any fool with a D in GCSE maths knows this!
Camp 1: It could be either, but if a problem like this appeared in my degree level maths the answer would probably be 1.
6/((1+2)+(1+2))
or
or 6÷2(1+2)
6 / (2+4)
6 / 6
= 1
A* at GCSE would suggest i wasn't exactly talking out my arse btw 'Haircut'.
6
_____
2(1+2)
also gives 1 and it's framed the same way as the question in the op
+1
I came up with 1, but it's a really badly written question. Brackets first, then the way it reads seems to imply doing the multiplication next which gets you to 6/6=1.
Edit: my maths background is a mediocre physics degree![]()
Wow, how can you do a physics degree and not know this... physics is based entirely on maths gah...
If you started let alone finished your degree then you would know that with maths you can not imply at all, you find results based on what you know, not what you think might be true...
BODMAS rules all!!
BODMAS rules all!!
[FnG]magnolia;19013254 said:This thread has over 6,000 views.
Six thousand.
Well, gosh.
Wow, how can you do a physics degree and not know this... physics is based entirely on maths gah...
If you started let alone finished your degree then you would know that with maths you can not imply at all, you find results based on what you know, not what you think might be true...
BODMAS rules all!!
Didn't we have the same with 0.9R=1 a while back?
It does by the way![]()