So basicaly someon posted this cancer on FB and a lot of fags are saying that answer is 40, some even 92
I think it's 96 but this post try to make you feel like idiot. What do you guys think it is?
>>687316317
agree
>>687316069
It's 19, you fucking retard.
96 of course
>>687316069
Why must you be a faggot and post this
>>687316069
(8x11) + 8 = 96
guaranteed replies, go fuck yourself you dipshit, everyone knows the answer
>>687316069
its 96
>>687316069
its 19, just because they dont know how to do math doesnt mean you have to act like an idiot as well
>>687316069
>2+5=12
>3+6=21
40
>>687316069
It's 40.
>1+4=5
>3+5+5=12,
>3-6+12=21
>8+11+21=40
Now go back to facebook, retard.
40
/thread
It's 40 retards
>19
/Thread
96 because z=answer, y=middle number, x=first number
z=x*(y+1)
>>687316795
>3+5+5=12
Heh.
You add the result with the numbers in the next line that is why the last line is 21+8+11= 40
>>687316795
>Came to Facebook
>saw this
>went back to 4chan
>>687316631
Nice, I didn't see it. My first though was 40 but 96 works too :)
>>687316069
You add the two numbers, plus the sum of the line before to continue the pattern. The answer is 40
>>687316069
here and in china the answer is the same, 8+11=19
96 and 52 both fit.
Agree 96. First number multiplied by second number then add first number to product.
>>687316069
It's 96
1 * 4 + 1 = 5
2 * 5 +2 =12
3 * 6 + 3 = 21
8 * 11 + 8 = 96
>>687316069
>someone posted cancer
>reposts cancer
>cancer
1/10 got me to reply
>>687317135
Why 52 ?
>>687317020
Ah, good observation. So 40, 52 and 96 are all solutions.
>>687316778
Yes, the + operator is being used to mean something other than addition. If that's too much for you, you can go.
>>687316795
Basicly this post is to make you feel like dumbass becaus it has two answers
>>687316069
It's 40 you humongous retard. The answer is generated by adding the previous result to the new result of the numbers added on the left. This is literally pattern-finding shit that 8 year olds learn.
1+4=5
2+5=7+5=12
3+6=9+12=21
8+11=19+21=40
You're fucking welcome
>>687316069
actually, it's
8 + 11, which, according to the rules and written with all the parts that contribute to the sum, leads to...
8 + 11 =^ 8 + 11 + (7 + 10) = 36
96. All you other faggots can go and whistle.
Let X be the first number, Y the second, and Z the third
X*(Y+1)=Z
Lets try it out
1*(4+1)=5
2*(5+1)=12
3*(6+1)=21
8*(11+1)=96.
Y'all are dumb
>>687317146
It's same to
A * (B+1)
>>687316069
Its to make you feel dumb becaus there are multiple solutions
>>687317382
imagine thinking 8 + 11 is 96
>>687316069
WHat the fuck is this shit
2 + 5 is 7 not 12, go to grade school retards,
ITT: Absolute, unadulterated retardation.
>>687316800
>>687316833
Dubs don't lie
Based on the information given 40 and 96 could be right.
More examples would be needed to prove which is correct.
>>687317718
If either.
it's 99 the x is slightly tilted
Its 40 you lowlife dipshits.
>>687317152
>says +
>sees *
Literal retard can't even read an operator taught in 1st grade.
>>687316069
1+4 = 5 that is, (1*4) + 1
2+5 = 12 that is, (2*5) + 2
Doing the same...
(8*11)+8 = 96
96 if it's a true function, 40 if it's recursive, literally any value if you plot a quartic to the value you want it to be.
96 is the best answer. Children will like 40.
It's 21+11+8=40. The first is the correct equation while you add the two numbers being added to the total sum.
>>687317248
Why 52 ? Can't solve it.
52
>>687317382
>8*(11+1)=96.
Kek
>>687316069
The answer is 19. The middle two are wrong.
>lrn2math
>>687318197
>>8*(11+1)=96
11+1=12
8*12=96
>kek
>>687318189
Oh OK.
It's A + B - 2A
>>687316069
The answer is a superposition of 19, 40, and 96. The latter two in regards to possible pattern recognitions, with the first being the normal answer if we consider the equations separately since there is no question posing "given the first three equations, what is the answer to the fourth equation".
>>687316069
40 you idiots
>>687317953
Thanks anon you make me feel better
>>687318439
Sorry 10A + B - 2A = next solution
>>687316069
For those of you who are too thick to understand here is how it works:
The solution has 2 answers, and it's never stated which is right so there is no real answer:
The first solution is that the product of the last equation gets added to the new equation:
so
0 + 1 + 4 = 5
5 + 2 + 5 = 12
12 + 3 + 6 = 21
21 + 8 +11 = 40
The second solution goes as follows:
if we define each problem to be x + y = z,
we re-arrange the equation to be x + (y * x) = z.
so:
1 + (4 * 1) = 5
2 + (5 * 2) = 12
3 + (6 * 3) = 21
8 + (11 * 8) = 96
IS EVERYONE HAPPY?
40
>>687316069
I figured out 3 ways to solve it, all equally valid:
1 - 40. Simply keep adding the numbers on the left side to the previous row.
2-96 Redefine x + y as f(x,y) = xy+x, so that
8*11 + 8 = 96
3 - 52 - Similar to 96, but the function is f(n,x,y) = ny + x, where n is the line number.
Any one of these is a valid solution. There's probably a few more.
>>687316069
1+4=5
2+5+5+12
3+6+6+6=21
4+7+7+7+7=32
5+8+8+8+8+8=45
6+9+9+9+9+9+9=60
7+10+10+10+10+10+10+10=77
8+11+11+11+11+11+11+11+11=96
fucking retards
>>687316069
>implying it's not 19 just because the statements before it were false
>>687318880
>>687318787
>>687317382
>>687317152
>>687317290
>implying any of this is 'valid' mathematically.
You would all make terrible scientists.
>>687318787
You are literally retarded. You can't just change the addition operator to a multiplication operator and say that 96 is an acceptable answer. Holy fuck!
You nig nogs the answer is 96
x + y = z
First number, times second number, plus the first number
So 1 times 4 is 4. Plus 1 is 5
2 times five is 10. Plus 2 is 12
3 times 6 is 18. Plus 3 is 21
So 8 times 11 is 88. Plus 8
Is 96.
Probably not the right way to don't but that's the pattern i noticed
>>687318717
Are you sure?
>>687319168
So you don't understand how patterns work?
my dad is a ten-yeared math professor and he says its 19
>>687319527
Tenured?
>>687318880
Just find a new one : 30
With
A + B = ?
C + D = 8A + B
E + F = 8C + D
>>687319527
>ten-yeared
>>687316069
You people are fucking retarded.
Last answer plus the sum of the next two numbers. Since there are no numbers before 1 + 4 the answer will be 0 (nothing) plus 1+ 4 (5).
8+11=19
19+21=40
>>687319507
Causation and Correlation are pretty important, y'know.
Assumptions are bad, m'kay? There are no clearly worded instructions, just mathematical sentences.
You guys just looked for patterns and assumed that the goal of the image was to do A or B. Or that there was a goal at all, as opposed to being bait or an inside joke.
>>687319318
Nope, it works but the result is 30 See it
>>687319609
>>687319168
>implying it's not 19 just because the statements before it were false.
That the statements that where given are correct is assumed.
It is a riddle.
Yes, that is implied.
>Implying a scientist wouldn't understand this.
Now that's just being a cunt.
>>687316688
This
>>687320132
This one still has multiplication
>>687319244
>>687318962
>>687318880
>>687318787
>>687318516
>>687318197
>>687318407
>>687319273
>>687319856
>8 + 11 = 96
This whole board is retarded. Just because there were false statements before the question doesn't mean you give a false answer. The answer to 8 + 11 is 19, regardless of the context.
1+4=5
2+5=12
3+6=21
4+7=32
5+8=45
6+9=60
7+10=77
8+11=88
>>687316069
Its 33 because 3•11
Simple shit
96
>>687320485
>The answer to 8 + 11 is 19, regardless of the context.
I would sure hate to be autistic.
>>687320485
this
fuck these retarded equations made by people who don't know basic math
>>687320485
>The answer to 8+11 is 19, unless context is provided as to why that no longer follows.
ftfy
>>687319811
Nah, you just couldn't see a pattern
>>687316069
1/4
Try again OP
>>687320485
= is just a sign and its meaning is only conventional. 1 + 1 = 1 if it is boolean algebra, so fuck you. The context is important.
>>687316069
1 + 4 = 5 => 1 * 4 + 1 = 5
2 + 5 = 12 => 2 * 5 + 2 = 12
3 + 6 = 21 => 3 * 6 + 3 = 21
8 + 11 = ? => 8 * 11 + 8 = 96
>>687321106
nah 1+1=2
thread over
>>687321106
Nope. In boolean algebra 1+1 = 10 (or 0 if there is an overflow)
>>687321298
>>687321298
Don't help those retards, they should be able to solve it on their own.
>>687321106
>= is just a sign and its meaning is only conventional
kill yourself
>>687316317
yep
>>687316496
its a retard wranglin' riddle.
Fuck yer fancy formulas m8.
1 + 4 actually means 1 * 5
2 + 5 actually means 2 * 6
3 + 6 actually means 3 * 7
Thus 8 + 11 actually means 8 * 12
96
I came up with 66,but I'm probably using a different pattern than all of you.
>>687321433
Are you fucking stupid or just kidding?
1 + 1 = 10 is from simple arithmetic if binary numbers are used. In boolean algebra 1 + 1 = 1, because (True) OR (True) is (True) and (The universal set) U (The universal set) is (The universal set)
the answer is...
!!!!!!42¡¡¡¡¡¡
>>687321049
Do you see patterns in your cheerios? Do they tell you to shoot people?
Just saying. While it would be wholly valid to INFER that there is indeed a pattern within each sentence, and that the last incomplete sentence follows said pattern, the only one who is explicitly establishing that there is a pattern is... (You), if you are saying that there is a pattern, bar none.
Numbers are not words. They, on their own, fail to convey anything else but raw value. You need -context-, like how many cheerios are in your bowl of milk, or how many bullets you carried with you, to start working with them in a way that makes sense.
If I show you a picture of a blue circle on nothing but white background, and tell you that you were supposed to get the phrase "kill yourself", would you have known 100% of the times I could have shown you that image?
Fuck no. That's statistically improbable, and there's a far greater weight on the non-zero chance that you are one of the anons who, for various reasons, thinks everything is telling them to kill themselves.
>>687322189
this guys gets it
I've found 4 answer to this enigma
A) 40
B) 96
C) 52
D) 30
>104 posters
>68 unique IPs
>only 10% of all unique IPs actually post
Yeah, having a fun time samefag baiting your thread, OP?
Someone here doesn't know how to announce a math problem.
>>687321626
If you are so narrow-minded an your way of thinking is strongly bound to the standards, this is rather a reason for your suicide, not mine.
>>687322566
Not baiting genuine question
it's 28 you retarded faggots. you take the sum of the current and add the previous sum
>>687316069
is the 1st number * 2nd number + sequence number
>>687322566
nice dubs kog
>>687319175
the fact that the operator doesnt act as an addition operator is the whole fucking part of the riddle, you dumb fucking nigger.
>>687316069
This cancer is meant to create controversy, there is not enough information, so it could be 40 if you add the previous result, 96 if you multiply or whatever the hell your invented rule gives you
>>687316069
its 96
its a*(b+1)
ezpz
Do you people not know reading comprehension? There are NO instruction to this problem, so by itself, pattern recognition is completely useless as the top three equations have no contextual relation to the last equation.
Therefore, the answer is clearly 19.
41
>>687316069
found the pattern
its the first number times the second then you add the first number
1*4+1=5
2*5+2=12
3*6+3=21
8*11+8=96
im sure someone already got this but im not gonna go through the whole thread
>>687316069
(a+b)+ answer of the previous line. So (8+11)+21 = 40/
>>687316069
96 lol
>>687323018
well played
>mfw math bait threads have been on 4chan since its inception and never fail to suck the energy right out of normalfags
>>687322231
My bad, but it's not a "plus sign" but a cross. It doesn't mean the same thing.
>>687323018
Their being on the same picture shows the contextual relationships between the equations you dumbass.
It's 88 faggets.
>>687323134
What if there is no previous line ?
>>687323079
>its the first number times the second then you add the first number
That's the same as "first number times (second number +1)"
1+4 is 5. 2+5 is 7, plus 5 is 12. 3+6 is 9, plus 12 is 21. 8+11 is 19, plus 21 is 40.
>>687322580
Not a "math" problem but a "logical" problem. We have to find why the previous results is like that.
>>687320485
a good point, but lets suppose eh?
>>687323018
>no contextual relation
You're supposed to create a logical one by yourself which is an indication of intelligence. My answer is 96, which is plausible and easy to explain.
>>687323574
>>687323079
also, though you might be correct, there is more than one pattern to be found.
>>687323659
If you think a little more, you will find a lot of other valid patterns. Maybe it's time to start a flamewar which one is The True pattern, that is the one intended by the author.
>>687320485
Are you autistic?
Hey fucking retards who say 40...what about 4,5,6 and 7 lines....its 96 you incoherent mathematically retarded morons
>>687322266
Well, the context in this case is a meme that looks like a classic pattern problem that you see in different brainteaser books. So I'm feeling pretty confident that you're not nearly as smart as you think you are.
>>687316243
First post best post.
>>687323942
Yeah. After thinking I got pic related too.
It's obvious this image has multiple solutions based on the context it's given in. If you can only work with the 4 equations and nothing else, it's 40.
If you are able to fI'll in the missing pieces. It's 96.
>>687316069
If(19 == true)
>good work anon you know 1st grade math
Else
>your a fucking idiot
33 maybe
>>687322890
Ding Ding Ding!
>>687322816
Hold up. Are you saying that the function of an addition operator... a LOGICAL FUNCTION, changes when surrounding constants or variables are placed next to it?
Are you telling me that (ADD) turns into (SUBTRACT), despite the (ADD) remaining a "+"?
>>687323348
I guess so, huh. 1+1 = 67 - 2*5^0 > 1, and it all equals 5/107.
>>687323864
Alright, but that means you need to have an established way to determine who's logic is an indication of intelligence... aka, who's logic or method is most rational and thus valid.
Unless you're just saying that we're making stuff up as long as it seems plausible or at least conforms to certain logical operations, and are going to ignore every other answer that doesn't line up with our answers, because we are correct because of our self-described method that does not rely upon unfalsifiable proofs.
>>687324201
That would be fair if memes were the means to measure "smarts". Also, it would be undeniable if the meme -was- a classic pattern problem that you see in different brainteaser books, and we had several sources to confirm this, and they all had distinct flavor text describing what the problem actually entailed...
I'm sorry, but I don't appear to see any of that. So you can forget that air of confidence, because I never once explicitly said I was nearly as smart as I think I am.
There you go, reading into things again.
>>687316069
96 is correct had to look twice on first look it seems like 40
Does anyone remember the days of 4chan full of competent but highly fucked up individuals posting their fucked up shit they find or think about....now it seems to be all punk kids and closet homos...damn i miss the endless entertainment that was 4chan
>>687316069
RIP 4chan
>>687324845
Look at yourself and the effort you've put into this thread
>>687317258
So implied mathematics is a thing now?
You're like a faggot calling people who aren't mentally ill wrong.
>>687316069
96 dumbass
>>687324845
It's 19 you fucking homo. The fact that you went through all that means you're not only stupid but autistic and super aspy.
>Protip: You literally cannot resist replying to this to correct me.
1+4=5
2+5=12
3+6=21
4+7=32
5+8=45
6+9=60
7+10=77
8+11=96
Any guesses?
>>687325291
Okay.
Looked at myself, and looked at the effort I decided to put into this thread...
Where are we going with this again... ? You mind telling me, so I don't accidentally misinterpret what you're trying to put across?
>>687325485
Protip: I heavily suggested it was 19. If you don't know that yet, you'll know it now: I think it's 19.
I think you replied to the wrong post, or just saw the salad of "math" I typed as an example and thought I was doing something I wasn't.
>>687325295
Sign like +, -, /, whatever, can mean anything you want them to mean. The same goes for digits. Math is very abstract thing and if you want to change everything in a given context, it's ok (do you want an example of the situation when "1" means "f(x)=x" ? )
>>687316069
i hate this place
>>687326096
Feel free to get the fuck out.
>>687316243
/thread
the rest of this place is filled with cancer
>>687316069
96 it is
>>687316631
Sure is summer in here.
>>687316069
The answer is 40 you tweet heads
fuck math, do drugs kids
>>687322189
/threderino
>>687325844
>Protip saying cannot resist replying
>Replies anyway
>I heavily suggested 8+11 = 19
>No one has done math this difficult before.
Fucking autism, aspergers, and severe retardation confirmed.
>>687325738
Spot on b/ro the logic of the photo is a sequence of numbers in equations not just the equations visible
>>687325844
Nah I'm good. Did they ever teach you how to make inferences at autist camp or were you sick that day?
>>687316795
Ye because 3+5+5 is 12
Good try
>>687316069
The answer is whoever made it is an autistic faggot who cannot math.
>>687325851
>Sign like +, -, /, whatever, can mean anything you want them to mean
>Math is very abstract thing and if you want to change everything in a given context, it's ok
You seem like the type that would wake up one day feeling like a girl, then the next a boy, and then go about trying to convince everyone else they're wrong for not seeing it.
>>687316069
Obviously 96.
a * b + a = c
1 * 4 + 1 = 5
2 * 5 + 2 = 12
3 * 6 + 3 = 21
8 * 11 + 8 = 96
Wouldn't be surprised if a lot more "rules" can be found within this to get different results so yea. Cancer.
>>687326869
You seem like a person who's bad at math
>>687326599
I'm correcting you only now, though. I also never said that no one has ever done math like that- I guess you were too late to read the entire thread.
Have fun inside, cause it sure is hot out there.
>>687326649
I never went to your summer camp, man. I acknowledged the ability to make inferences, and what that would mean, a long ass while ago. Stop texting me.
>>687326917
Where's the *?
>Literally is none
>Sees wrong math and illogically connects 2 wrong answers with the solution to the 3rd
>Makes up multiplication signs as if they were there
>Obviously
Obviously.
>>687316069
n * (3 + n) + n = answer, so yes 96
>>687316069
It is 40 though.
>in after some retards already tried to enforce their special brand of bullshit reason for why the right answer is obviously wrong.
>>687327101
No one's going to scroll up to read all your faggotry. Solid "I know you are but what am I" comeback though.
>>687327101
I was specifically replying to you.
I'll allow you the rest of the day to argue with yourself about it.
>>687327190
Amazing how you don't realize that the plus sign does not represent an actual plus sign in this "equation".
>>687316069
It's 40 fucktards
>>687326869
Wrong comparison. I would make a long post about why are you stupid and narrow-minded, but I'm lazy and you're not the first one I'm telling all this to. So just gfys.
>>687326869
Just pick up a programming language like C++, really easy to rewrite operator+ to mean something else
>>687327399
Thanks. This lets me sleep at night.
>>687327472
You weren't replying to anyone else when you replied to me? No shit! I thought you were replying to some other faggot!
That is autism. You're saying a whole lot of nothing quicker than it takes me to type this shit alone.
>>687327538
>Don't see
>Literally isn't there
You must be one special snowflake.
>>687316069
>2+5=12
fixed, any other answer is wrong
>>687316069
n+n*(n+3)
>>687327692
>Narrow minded
>Math
How do you even remember to breathe...
This post if fucking gay. You can't change math. If you want to add other numbers, put it in an equation. 11+8= 19. No matter what faggotry you say or come back with.
>>687327343
One solution is 40. It really depends on what pattern you identify.
a = a+b+c -> 40
a = b*c+b ->96
There's more.
>>687316243
Thank you anon
>>687327721
Your desperation to save your face and pride is glorious, please continue.
>>687327695
>The operator +
>Mean something else
>Operator +
K.
>>687328234
My niggerfaggot anon face, yes. Not to mention, my homosexual pride.
>>687327933
I don't understand what is the relationship between the two greentexts.
>>687328418
Exactly, that's why you drafted this novel: >>687324845
it's 40 faggot
>>687316069
The answare is 2.
>>687317152
>this post has it right.
>mathfag here.
>>687327996
You can't change math, but you definitely can change the meaning of the + sign.
>>687327996
True. Implied math doesn't exist
>>687328381
do something else*
>>687324660
>comparing integers with booleans
You're not that good with this programming business, are you now?
>>687316069
96 obv
>>687328013
Incompetents is like an std...just spreads to no end until one mother fucker looks down and goes wooooaaaa i ajnt fucking with that shit....40 would be discounting lines 4,5,6 and 7
>>687328629
That's kinda fucking gay though. It would be like swapping the button keys on a keyboard
>>687328653
Well I guess if you were to change the meaning of the operator "do" to "mean" then what you said would make perfect sense, you just have to change the language in C++.
>>687316069
Its whatever you want it to be (except math)
{40,96}
>>687328526
You're deciding why I do things now? Am I just your fanfiction? Am I a real human being?
You don't think I just typed all that because I could, right? Nah. I'm definitely not wasting my time on /b/ in a thread that's about to 404.
In case the sarcasm doesn't reach you: I give 0 fucks about saving face or pride. I don't understand why you'd think there was pride in /b/ to begin with. The sole reason this reply chain is happening, is because you want it to, and either have hangups regarding the subject that you so masterfully projected onto me, or you also give 0 fucks, and we're just fucking about.
Except I'm actually putting a little effort that I give 0 fucks about wasting into my posts. Because, fuck shit.
1(4) +1 = 5
2(5) +2 = 12
3(6)+3 = 21
8(11) + 8 =96
>>687328649
That offends people who are math-fluid. Please report to sensitivity training. If they wake up and decide + means * then you should have enough courtesy to accommodate their mental illness.
What are you, a math bigot? 8 + 11 can't equal 43646?
(A * B) + A
(8 x 11) + 8 = 96
>>687329069
Oh fuck your second installment of your diminishing pride is a best seller, please continue your mental breakdown.
>>687320485
youre correct! when i write 10! i just really like the number 10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>687329327
I don't have to.
You're writing the novellas for me.
>>687328849
It's very stupid to think so.
>>687316069
1+4=5
2+5=7+5=12
3+6=9+12=21
8+11=19+21=40
1*4+1=5
2*5+2=12
3*6+3=21
8*11+8=96
19, the rest are wrong except the first.
>>687329414
>Except I'm actually putting a little effort that I give 0 fucks about wasting into my posts.
>Writes long winded reply to save face on internet
>0 fucks
This is killing you inside and we're all watching it happen.
>>687329683
>1=2=3
Don't do that.
>>687316069
I'm studying math and I can tell you, that you can define an operator as you wish. It wouldn't be recommended to use the + sign though, because people with "basic math" skills get confused and angry at the fact, that 8+11 is no longer 19 in this context.
so easy it's 32 !!!
>>687329706
Like watching paint dry.
I don't know if you have the ability to understand that people have different capacities, or different dispositions.
Me typing a "novel" should be indicative of the fact that I can actually type novels, and these "novels" are not figuratively, but literally worth nothing of value to me.
Watching you reply, on the other hand, attempting to move the goalposts, is fun.
It's 96 you fucking Retards.
>>687330038
Finally someone who thinks the same way I do. Don't try to explain it to these middle school dropouts, it's useless, I tried.
>>687316317
yep did it end up bring something close to
1*(4+(1))
2*(5+(1))
---
8*(11+1)= 96?
>>687329881
sorry youre right thats confusing, what i mean is you find the sum but then you add the previous result to the sum and get the new sum
1+4+0=5
2+5+5=12
3+6+12=21
8+11+21=40
3/5
It's 52.
96
>>687319168
> that its not an input output table fucking scrub.
>>687316317
Yep. Took me 10 seconds. Max.
>>687316069
1+4 = 5
2+5= 7 (7+5=12)
3+6=9 (9+12=21)
8+11=19(19+21=40)
>when no one gets this
>>687330038
The operator here takes two natural numbers and transforms it into one natural number it seems.
You would write something like:
+: N -> N, (x,y) |-> x*(y+1)
Where N is the set of whole numbers and * is the standard multiplikation.
But there can be more definition of + which would make those three statements true.
1 + 4 =5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21
8 + 11 = 40
9 + 12 = 61
10 + 13 = 84
1(4+1)=5
2(5+1)=12
3(6+1)=21
4(7+1)=32
5(8+1)=45
6(9+1)=60
7(10+1)=77
8(11+1)=96
>>687316069
Negative reverse choice banded 69, final answer.
>>687330779
read literally less than 10 posts above you
fuckin shit eating faggot
>>687330038
What definitely is NOT allowed in math is to add the result of the previous equation. Every equation stands for itself unless you write it as a matrix.
>>687316069
Answer is 40, it's adding all the numbers together
>>687316069
Multiplier of the second number increases with the line so:
1 + 1(4) = 5
2 + 2(5) = 12
3 + 3(6) = 21
8 + 4(11) = 52
Anyway it's retarded.
>>687316317
I agree
stoopid base 10 idiots.
1+4=5 (base 6)
2+5=12 (base 5)
3+6=21 (base 4)
8+11=201 (base 3)
>>687316069
This doesn't even need basic math it's just last answer +2 and add the rest of the equation so 2+5=7+2 = add 9 to 12 same thing applies to all of it, it's just bad and op should feel bad
>>687316069
Its 30 going down the line
YOU ARE ALL SO MENTALLY STUPID. IT IS
> 4 * 1 = 4 + 1 = 5
> 5 * 2 = 10 + 2 = 12
> 6 * 3 = 18 + 3 = 21
> 11 * 8 = 88 + 8 = 96
>>687316069
It's 96 because it's the first number times the second number + 1 for all of them.
>>687330779
so what is the rule you're using?
why isn't anything added to the first equation?
>>687331239
It should be clear that this riddle is not related to strict math.
>>687331416
no. its a times b plus a.
your solution is based on a certain patern. what if i added 4 plus 7 in between? your result would change, mine wouldnt.
52
>>687331913
With this I mean is x + y with their overloaded + operator translates to x * (y + 1) with the standard + operator
>>687331907
>>687331913
Yes. But it's ALSO 40, because every last result added to the sum of the two numbers will also give the correct result.
>>687331987
Then there are endless possibilities only restricted by your fantasy.
>>687331945
The first to a sequence is usually an exception.
>1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, etc.
1+4×1=5
2+5×2=12
3+6×3=21
8+11×4=52
Answer is 52. Bye.
>>687332028
Both patterns are valid.
There is no condition that there have to be any other equations following the pattern.
>>687316069
96 is right.
the algorithm they use, in the format a+b=c, is (a*b+a)=c
EX:
1*4 +1 =5
2*5+2=12
3*6+3=21
so 8*11=88+8=96
>>687332579
Of course. This is what makes puzzles interesting.
>>687332782
You're retarded... why would you have any reason to think those equations HAVE to come in that order and there can't possibly be any other equations squeezed in between them? Why couldn't the fourth equation have been this: 4 + 7 = ? then the fifth equation have been 8 + 11 = ?. If that was the case your answer to 8 + 11 would have changed.
>>687316069
probably 96
There is different ways if it is a visual problem(9+6 is not equal to 21 so I don't know how it couldn't be):
-It could be :first 1+4=5 Uo=5
then (2+5)+5=12 U1=12
(3+6)+12=21
(4+7)+21=32
(5+8)+32=45
[Un+1= Un +5+2n]
[...]
(8+11)+77=96
Don't forget thatthere is an order to do it, there is a logic, look at the construction before saying it's 40.
(1+4)
(2+5)
(3+6)
(4+7)
(5+8)
(6+9)
[...]
Please don't do (8+11)+21 =40 Like a retard
>>687332579
Sure there are virtually endless possibilities, but that doesn't mean literally anything will work. That's the point.
>>687316069
89?
>>687316069
40 is the answer you retarded, i may be little autistic but even I know how to get the answer right.
>>687333225
No.
No one said about changing the order or adding any other equations. His answer is valid.
>>687331991
19 (base 10) = 201 (base 3). So yes, we're right. :P
>>687333514
sorry 96, messed up
>>687316243
nice
>>687333491
Yes, I think it's fair to say that 96 is the MOST correct answer, because it is completely independent of any other equations or the order the equations come in. It's the correct answer for all a, b in all number systems for any independent equation given. The other solutions change depending on the sequence of equations or if other equations were thrown in between. The result of 3 + 7 could change if you add or remove equations before it which is stupid.
>>687316317
alright.
here, "|" will equal one
so, eight = | | | | | | | |
plus eleven = | | | | | | | | | | |
equals | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
and | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | equals 19
>>687333525
No it's not... Where did he get the 4 in 8+11x4=52 from? He got it because it's the fourth equation listed.
>>687331574
this
almost all other answers are retarded.
>>687316243
>inb4 non computer scientist who doesn't know what operator overloading is.
>>687316069
answer is 19
>inb4 30 faggots saying its wrong because it doesn't fit some implied pattern.
declare it a puzzle if you want it treated like a puzzle. I'm not changing maths just for shits and giggles.
>>687316069
to me the pattern looks like (n+1) times m - 3
[(1+1) x 4] - 3 = 5
[(2+1) x 5] - 3 = 12
[(3+1) x 6] - 3 = 21
[(8+1) x 11] - 3 = 96
ITT: Pointless shit
who cares what the answer is?
personally I prefer 96 because you don't need previous equations to have an answer and can just use a formula, but in this case it's too ambiguous
>>687327066
because 8 x 9 is only 17
why? because I said so, and math is very abstract
>>687334577
Ah, yes, the image is clearly that of a programing language.
Not something on paper, which causes the likelihood of the former statement to become even more unlikely.
it looks like some retard might get a 50% on his math homework if he learns how to do math properly.
but here little Timmy. It's 19
>>687325851
>with common core, everyone is right and equal - even niggers
+ means addition. = means equivalence
These meanings have been accepted worldwide for centuries. Changing them to have no meaning would create more problems that it would solve.
Is this part of the campaign that says boys and girls are equal?
