Are you genius ??
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Are you genius ??
-17 faggot
>>714522408
it's -13 you moron
>>714522340
-17 uhhhhh freakin genius man.
>>714522408
>This
End of thread
Thank you for participating
its 2 you fucking retards
>>714522440
Trollin' no' workin'
>>714522440
top kek you blithering imbocile, its -17, prove me wrong.
>protip; you cant
>>714522487
>>714522508
>Trollin no' workin'
Same as you
69
it's incomprehensible without parentheses
On this day I realized humanity is truly fucked.
>>714522440
PEMDSA
+1
3 - 3 x 6 + 2
3 - (3 x 6) + 2
3 - 18 + 2
left to right, addition has no priority over subtraction
3 - 18 = -15
-15 + 2 = -13
- 13
>>714522604
fuck this thread
>>714522521
lel
>icanteven.png
>>714522340
the answer is made of numbers
numbers in our subjective reality can't show the proportions of op's faggotry
>>714522604
then why the fuck do schools drill you with BEDMAS/PEDMAS/PEMDAS?
Fucking bonobo.
>>714522340
17 let's check on google ...
fuck, google say -13
>>714522440
Answer.
>>714522476 (me)
>>714522604
Ho shit, you're right.
My apologies.
Put it in a calculator ffs.
Then learn the order of operations do this doesn't happen again.
>>714522521
3x6=18
3-18=-15
Adding to a negative is like subtracting from a positive. Adding Two to Negative Fifteen would make it *gasp* Negative Thirteen.
Pro Tip, don't drop out of third grade.
>>714522560
Idiot! There are no parentheses..... because you DON'T NEED any fucking parentheses to solve it!
1+1= this post end with 2
If you want to make the addition first you have to calculate (-18+2)=(-16)
Then you go 3-16=(-13). It doesnt matter what you take which one you calculate first
>>714522828
If this post end with something else than a 6 that mean i am alpha as fuck. :D
>>714522856
It's true, but the rule is, from left to right.
>>714522734
Assuming your calculator works that was.
>>714522817
without parantheses it amounts to -13
but how could we possibly know that that is the desired answer without proper term building and context
it's definitely at least 40
>>714523069
i hope people get this reference and don't call me retarded
>>714523142
Nope. You're retarded
>>714522340
But 3-3 = 0 and so that times 6 is also 0. Plus 2 just makes 2.
Update your math to follow the laws of logic pls.
>>714523041
I just don't understand why you are confused. You don't NEED a paranthes here, the rules of maths clearly states that you do the multiplication first, and then adding and subtr from left to right.
>>714523191
Multiplication prioritizes over.
You multiply BEFORE anything.
Then you do the remaining operation
>>714523242
But there is no logical reason to do so as far as i can see.
>>714523242
You, sir, are completely right.
Sincerely >>714523234
>>714523291
>as far as i can see.
Then you haven't seen much.
>>714523328
That is a cop out answer. If you had an answer explaining it would be simple.
>>714523291
Flip those burgers dude.
>>714523381
Come up with something better than an ad hominem to cloak that you do not have a good answer.
>>714523291
You don't need to see. That's how it is done, no question why.
That's the first thing you ought to learn while first learning about multiplication and divisions (both prioritize).
If your teacher didn't tell you this, sue him/her
>>714522340
Lets rearrange it a little bit.
x = 3 - 3 * 6 + 2
x = 3 + 2 - 3 * 6
x = 5 - 3 * 6
x = 5 - 18
x = -13
If you're a retarded nigger and do left to right
x = 3 - 3 * 6 + 2
x = 0 * 6 + 2
x = 0 + 2
x = 2
Your typical Murican
x = 3 - 3 * 6 + 2
x = 3 - 3 * 18
x = 3 - 54
x = -51
Can you Tri-force?
>>714523379
Look at those two then...
>>714523242
>>714523234
>>714523449
They did. But i disagree with anything being as it is without a good reason. Im simply wondering. Why dont you just rephrase the equation so the multiplication is simply in front. There is no reason for the prioritizing law. Unless you have a good reason for it?
>>714523488
That is not an answer... You cannot answer my question to a comment by referring to that same comment that does not hold the answer. My question is why there is prioritizing.
>>714522340
-17
>>714523291
The order of operations is literal 4th grade mathematics.
>>714523695
The order of operations might be pointlessly structured. Can you give me a reason as to why prioritizing is needed when you could simply put the multiplication part in the front of the equation?
>>714522752
Pro Tip: BODMAS
https://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=lkZJWO2XNfOQ8Qeo8rrgCA&gws_rd=ssl#q=calculator
Pro Tip: Check if you're right you chubby child and don't drop out of forth grade
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=3-3*6%2B2
>>714523519
You still don't get it, do you?
If you put it one way, it is supposed to be solved as it is.
If you change positions, it would make a completely different thing, to be solved that way.
>>714523600
It's easir to let you be an idiot, than to try to explain, You clearly just don't want to accept the mathematical rules that there are, so...... be happy in your piss-world.
>>714523519
If you disagree with simple math, because they don't fit to your conception of logic, then you're gonna have a hard time next.
Why would you do operation from left to right? And not from right to left? Is that because of how you write? Then, what about other language writing the other way? It's not more logical that anything.
try to solve this , so far nobody has got it right
>>714523827
Putting the multiplication in front simply demonstrates the order that it is supposed to be done in. The prioritizing is pointless.
>>714524075
FB fag go back to FB fags
>>714524048
I do not disagree with math. Im looking for an answer. As i opened "seemingly pointless". Can you give an answer. Or shall i mark you down with the rest as "defending something he does not understand".
>>714522340
3-3x6+2=
3-18+2
-15+2
-13
>>714524160
It's so this exact situation doesn't occur, where everybody is interpreting the equation differently, and because solving grouped expressions is often easier than just going left to right.
Holy shit dude this isn't rocket science.
>>714524160
An order of priority had to be choosen.
It's as arbitrary as anything.
It's a rule to follow in order to have everybody got the same result for a same operation.
It even changed through time (other priorities chosen).
It's the norm now, but there's no real reason whatsoever.
>>714524271
But no one would interpret it differently if it was simply at the front. You have no objection as to changing the law to "put the multiplication par in front.". Its good to have rules to save confusion. How about we change them to be less confusing.
>>714524377
ill refer that to >>714524388
>>714524085
I was wrong, there is no piss in your world. All the piss is in your head.
End of story.
>>714524445
You know those kinds of responses only paints you as the moron right? All that states is that you disagree with me, but you have no argument to present. That simply will not do in a secular society.
>>714523418
To understand how the Rules for the Order of Operations came about, one has to consider polynomial expressions in algebra. Look at the following polynomial function of degree 8 with coeffcients 17, 2, 1, 0, 0, 6, 0, 3, 4:
17x8+ 2x7+x6+ 6x3+ 3x+ 4;(1)
where x is any number. The notational simplicity of this expression must be obvious to one and all, and this simplicity is the result of a common agreement that what this expression really says is:
(17(x8)) + (2(x7)) + (x6)+(6(x3))+ (3x) + 4:(2)
To be precise, the symbolic notation in (1) is free of the annoying parentheses in (2) because the convention of performing the operations in the order indicated by the parentheses in (2) is universally accepted, namely, (A) exponents first, then multiplications, then additions.
To drive home the point, the sum 17x8+ 2x7 does not mean f[(17x)8+ 2]xg7; which would be the case if the operations were uniformly performed from left to right, but rather (17(x8)) + (2(x7)) as indicated in (2).
The rule of "multiplications before additions" may sound simple, but these three words contain more than meets the eye. Because we are in the realm of algebra, "division by a (nonzero) number c" is the same as "multiplication by 1c". Moreover, "minus c" is the same as "plus (-c)." Therefore if one rewrites what is in statement (A) above in the language of arithmetic, then one would have to expand it to:
(B) exponents first, then multiplications and divisions, then additions and subtractions.
(B) is seen to be exactly the same as the Rules for the Order of Operations. It is important to note that this stipulation about from "left to right" is entirely extraneous, because the associative laws of addition and multiplication ensure that it makes no difference whatsoever in what order the additions or multiplications are carried out.
This is why polynomials continue to be written as in expression (1).
>>714522340
Potato.
>>714522340
Yes, which is why I am not going to waste my time doing this simple math problem.
3-3=0
0x6=0
0+2 = 1
=1
i geniuse
>>714524075
Shake is 10.
Burger is 5.
Fries are 2.
10+10+10=30
10+5+5 = 20
5+2+2=9
5+2+10=17.
There are other possibilities with negative numbers, but that's the easiest solution.
>>714524075
>>714524096
This is such a cancer on FB, people keep falling on single item that was in a pair previously for 20th time.
>>714524547
Hey, stop trying to make us less stupid. It hurts my thinkmeat.
>>714522340
-13
>>714524813
Nevermind. I see my mistake.
Final equation only has a single fry.
Therefore, 5+1+10=16.
>>714522340
-3x6=-18
3-18=-15
-15+2=-13
Some were taught that the pairs of multiplication/division can be read like a book (Thus -13)
Some were taught that they have to be in the exact order of PEMDAS/similar
(Hence -17)
And some didn't fare so well in school
(2 and others)
Problem solved.
>>714524075
16.
>>714524965
even if you follow PEMDAS exactly the answer is still -13
>>714524932
But is it 3-(3x6)+2 or 3(-3x6)+2?
Because then it's either -13 or -52
>>714524885
How long are we going to wait for another
"Nevermind. I see my mistake."
Buddy?
>>714525095
P - none
E - none
M - 3x6 = 18
The equation is now 3-18+2
D - none
A - 18+2 = 20
The equation is now 3-20
S - 3-20 = -17
>>714525095
What he means is that some people were taught that Multiplication comes before division and addition comes before subtraction like in the PEMDAS notation, rather than in the order that they appear and sharing the same priority.
>>714523291
>why do we even math
>>714525163
-3x6=-18
-18+2=-16
3-16=-13
>>714525129
Forever?
16 is the correct answer.
-17 family
>>714525283
You're off by about 29 m8
>>714525250
You are tying the negative sign to the 18 when it is between the numbers in the equation of 3-(3*6), not the 18 itself. It should only stay in that part of the equation.
>>714524075
5+2x10=25
Algebra nerd about to check out, any questions before I go?
>>714522340
it equals dubs?
>>714525380
yes I am, because that's correct
there are no parentheses
>>714525380
It doesn't matter which way you do it, the answer would be the same. Your problem is that in 3-18+2, your prioritized 18+2=20. What you need to do is 3-18=-15. And then add 2.
When dealing with only addition and subtraction, you prioritize left to right.
>>714525283
5+1x10
5+10
15
M8.
>>714525452
It is not. In a normal equation you would never say a number is negative because it is being subtracted from the one before it if there are other logical options due to PEMDAS that can be given before that. I only put the parentheses in my equation to illustrate that that's what came first in the equation, it is still correct without them if you use it, but you are right, there are no parentheses, meaning not around the -18 and thus keeping it as 3 - 18 instead of 3 + (-18).
>>714525126
You see any brackets here? No?
Then its just 3-3*6+2. You can swap it to -3*6+3+2 if you like.
Answer is -13, and with those burgers its 25. You better go back to primary school if you cant solve it, fags
>>714525612
>In a normal equation you would never say a number is negative because it is being subtracted from the one before it
yes you would. that's what they taught me in high school anyway
>>714522340
-13
>>714525548
You did not read any of the other posts I've given before that, did you?
>>714524965
Left-to-right and addition before subtraction are both ways to do it taught in schools.
>>714525163
Your incorrect in the fact that addition comes before subtraction. I was taught that although division appers before multiplication they are both to be done in a left-to-right way, and the same with addition and subtraction. After you've removed the multiplication from the equation, you do it from left to right-
3-18+2
=-15+2
=-13
tldr: >>714525250
>>714525699
I guess I've never seen it taught like that, then. I don't doubt you, but the order of operations is really disputed in public education.
>>714525774
I was arguing how the answer in that method would get you to -17. I don't think it is right, I believe in left-to-right, but as I said in >>714524965,
that is a common method taught in schools. The argument there was just how that method would equal -17.
>>714525774
Whoops, same guy, forgot to mention that in the post you linked, it does not follow your order as he ties the subtraction sign to 18, making it -18 as its own number rather than subtracting 18. He's still doing it in the way you're arguing against, though.
>>714525654
Burgers is 15
Single fries instead of double.
Multiplication in the end.
-13 is correct though.
>>714525876
Sorry bud I didn't read the whole thread. I didn't know you were demonstrating a method so disregard my post.
>>714525748
I skimmed, but I saw how you did your equation and it was wrong. You prioritized addition over subtraction when they both have the same priority. In that case you solve from left to right.
-15 + 2= -13
>>714522962
>>no calculator on your device
>>714526016
Like I said, that is one way that schools teach it. I personally don't believe it's correct, I believe they have the same priority along with multiplication and division in their own set. I'm simply explaining both ways.
>>714525654
Where do you get 25?
I got 15. 5+1x10
>>714525957
Um, actually:
His method:
3-3*6+2
3(-3*6)+2
3(-18)+2
3-18+2
My method
3-3*6+2
3-(3*6)+2
3-(18)+2
3-18+2
See? They both come to the same point in each equation.
>>714525994
Oppss sorry, you right /b/ro, thanks. 15 then, yea. Single fries, ffs xD
>>714526088
The fact that a calculator is needed for such a simple equation is truly worrying.
>>714526166
Shouldn't it be 3*-18 instead of just 3-18 when simplified?
What if the x is a variable and not a multiplication symbol?
>>714526153
Whoa dude. This isn't algebraic equations. You're doing it wrong.
>>714526170
Some people miss the fries, some people miss the multiplication.
It's just something to trip people up and make pedantic people feel superior.
>>714526321
5+1*10 then.
Picky much?
>>714526260
Demonstrate how you worked that out...
>>714526260
No. You're adding multiplication where there is clearly none.
>>714526303
This is why people should always use *
>>714526166
But that is wrong, it should be
3-3*6+2= 3+(-3*6)+2 = 3 + (-18) + 2 = -15 + 2 = 13
It still the same answer, but the way you have written it it should come out
3(-3*6)+2 = 3(-18) + 2 = -54 + 2 = -52
since x(y) = x*y = xy
>>714526367
Because while the parentheses are present, it's multiplication. 3(-18). Which is 3*(-18)
But when you drop the parentheses, you turn it into 3-18.
So I'm pretty sure there's a flaw there.
>>714526352
Not what I meant. You added the +2 to the first 3. That's not how it's done. You solve the multiplication before you get into the addition and subtraction.
>>714526493
That's what I did?
5+1*10
1*10 = 10
5+10=15.
Tadaa
>>714526471
I was using brackets to indicate which part of the equation I was focusing on, not making them part of the equation. Therefore that operation does not take place.
>>714524075
Diabetes.
The answer is I now have diabetes
>>714526634
Ah, I see. It's confusing that parentheses are simultaneously a method for keeping track of a process order and also an actual mathematical modifier.
Should probably use [] or something for showing position.
>>714526603
No you didn't. You've done addition (3+2) then multiplication (1*10) then addition again (5+10).
It should be multiplication (-3*6) then subtraction (3-18) then addition (-15+2).
>>714526733
Thanks. I will in future.
3-3=0
0x6=0
0+2=2
it's 2
fuck off nigger
>>714524075
50. In equation #3 you'll notice that the fries are groups of two, whereas in equation #4 there is only one. Burger=5, Drink=10.
>>714527102
Yeah, that's how my mom did it, but she's not that great at maths.
>>714525380
>>714525380
What the actual fuck? From who did you learn maths? There is the negative number -3 multiplied by 6, - and + equals - so there will be -18 so the - Is from 18 itself because its a negative number
(3-3)*(6+2) =?
(0)*(8)=?
answer is 8, you degenerate fucks
>>714523069
With the little earths
>you're not wrong
i say the answer looks more like 70.
The x is a variable, not a multiplication sign. Therefore, you would simplify the problem and graph it out. So the answer is a graph, not a single number.
I would like to solve the Puzzle.
Who is Ted Cruz?
>>714522340
Its 420
>>714527630
Yeah because 8*0=8 I forgot
>>714527826
good, so now you have learned something.
>>714527630
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH
Good one, anon
>>714527630
That would be 0....
>>714527876
prove it.
>>714522340
the answer is 2
I hope it is not -13
because then this thread would have a point
will i bother to find out?
no, fuck you,
I know OP is a fucking retard
and it is -13
>>714526930
What are you talking about? The burger is 5 by itself. No addition necessary.
Burger: 5
Fry: 1
Shake: 10.
>>714527909
ok here: 8*0=0 you can verify it on google
>>714523142
You're not retarded, you're just afraid what people think of you.
