9 - 3 ÷ 1/3 + 1 = ? It's not 1. I don't care wha
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.
9 - 3 ÷ 1/3 + 1 = ?
It's not 1. I don't care what the experts say- 3 ÷ 1/3 is not 9. That literally makes no sense in any form.
Say you have 3 apples. You and 2 friends each get 1/3 of the apply supply. The value of 1/3 would be 1 apple. Not fucking NINE.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Abat5iBbw
>>684911106
So the 3 of you divided by the value of your share, or one-third, is 1.
How would you get 9 of something, from 3? In what world does that make sense?
>>684911106
Do you even math? Retard? Take 3 apples and cut each one into 3 pieces. You get 9.
division by a fraction is equivalent to multiplication by the reciprocal of the fraction
>>684911106
this is bait
sage in all fields
>experts
>multiplication and division
...
>>684911106
This is a new and original thread
>>684911106
>Say you have 3 apples. You and 2 friends each get 1/3 of the apply supply.
that statement is written 3/3 not 3/(1/3)
>>684911106
This is probably bit, but you're not dividing by 3, blockhead, you're dividing it by 1/3. You are taking 3 apples and cutting them into slices which are each 1/3 of an apple.
>Ergo 9 slices, knobface
If I'm not completely wrong it's around 0,9999999991
(It's virtually 1 cause the nines go on forever)
3÷1/3
= 9,000000000009
(there are more zeros but you get the point)
9-9,000000000009
= -0,000000000009
-0,000000000009+1
=0,999999999991
9-3÷1/3+1= 0,999999999991
Round it up and it's 1
(If i did any of the math wrongly please tell me)
>>684914633
u did it wrong faggot kill yourself
>>684911106
(3/1)÷(1/3)
Cross multiply =
9/1
If each "third of a person" gets 3 apples, then a full person would get 9. Basic meths anyone?
>>684914633
Dividing by a fraction is the same as multiplying the reciprocal, by doing that you get a whole number of 9 instead of all those messy floats from 1/3
>>684914945
What's the best place to livestream it?
>>684911106
What is 3 divided by 1/3 to you?
>>684914633
You did it wrong. It made me sad.
>>684915101
YouTube
>>684914973
Fucking baithreads fgt
>>684911106
one of the ways to begin solving this question is multiply everything by 3.. so with that in mind
9-3/ 1/3 +1
27-9/1+3 -9/1 is 9
27+9+1
Answer 37
>>684911106
just to add on to this your thinking of 3* 1/3
>>684915005
So 9-3*3+1?
Sorry for retard
>>684915222
you're a special kind of retard.
>>684911106
only right answer is 7.
>>684915179
Sorry for retard
>>684915222
The second step is 27-9x3 +1
..
>>684915219
Ok I'll do it later K?
OP here I think this man >>684915222
has convinced me
>>684915480
No, reciprocal is 3/1 not 3+1, you just flip your fraction
>>684915967
3/1 = 3 right?
So
3*3=9
9-9=0
0+1=1
Answer: 1
Or am I still retard
>>684911106
9*1/3=3
Therefore
3/(1/3)=9
>>684915222
initially multiplying by 3 is a good idea, but if you're going to multiply everything by 3, don't forget that you have to divide the result by 3.
in other words,
3*[9-3/ 1/3 + 1 = x]
So after crunching the numbers
27-9/1+3 = 3x
27-9+3=3x
18+3=3x
21=3x
you have to divide again
x=7
>>684912475
>>684914129
>>684914973
>>684915160
You are all missing the point. It says 3 divided by one-third. One third of 3 is 1.
>The subject is the 3 apples.
>1/3 of 3 apples is 1 apple
>NOWHERE DOES IT SAY OR IMPLY THAT YOU CUT THE APPLES INTO THIRDS, NOWHERE.
>>684911106
OP is a fag, learn math
>>684914633
.999… is one precisely because the 9s go forever.
>>684911106
>its not 1
it is 1
order of operations says to do multiplication/division which this is
so 3 divided by 1/3 is 1
next do addition subtraction so 9-1+1 which is 9
>>684916809
Exactly. You don't have 3 apples and cut them into thirds, and then have 9 apples. You still have 3 apples.
And you still have 3 people, who each want 1/3 of the apples, which is still 1 whole apple even when cut into equal fractions.
>>684911106
The only reason we need order of operations is because motherfuckerz don't write their calculations in an unambiguous way. I hate people sometimes. I hate myself too.
ITT retards try to feel smart by debating BIDMAS whilst real mathematicians don't write such ambiguous calculations and can therefore focus on real maths.
>>684916797
Yea I realized that I missed that step to late
>>684917071
1/3 of 3 is 1, so 3 divided by 1/3 is 3 bro.
>>684917358
I made a mistake
its 3 divided by a third which is 9
>>684917071
>so 3 divided by 1/3 is 1
nigga what? see
>>684916945
Did you all fail 3rd grade algebra or something?
>>684911106
It's Nine you fucking retard
>>684916945
Too many dumb fucks saying dividing by fraction is multiplying by reciprocal. None of you can prove it.
>inb4 /b/ thinks demonstrations are proofs.
>>684916945
win
>>684917576
in every instance of dividing by a fraction, multiplying by the fractions reciprocal will yield the same result
>>684917484
>>684917491
>3 divided by a third is 9
listen to how stupid you guys sound, all while accusing me of failing math.
You are literally getting a larger number by breaking a smaller number in to smaller parts. You're dumb as fuck.
>>684917576
>Too many dumb fucks saying dividing by fraction is multiplying by reciprocal
>None of you can prove it
3/10 troll, I feel a little bit angry
>>684917711
Nice proof.
>>684917783
You are saying 3 divided by one-third of 3 is 9. That is pure fucking nonsense.
3 TIMES 3 IS 9, YES. BUT NOT 3 DIVIDED BY 1. PROVE THAT IT IS.
>>684917746
Says you
its 3 that wants to divide 3 wholes into groups of 1/3
this means for each whole, there will be 3 thirds in each whole
so with 3 wholes thats 9 groups of 1/3
you're the dumb fuck
heres 3 gallons of water
divid 3 gallons of water into these 1/3rd gallon cups
how many 1/3rd gallon cups will you fill with 3 gallons of water?
9
>>684917071
3*(1/3) is 1.
3/(1/3) is 9.
do it on a calculator if you don't believe me.
>>684917922
see
>>684917484
I made a mistake because I didn't read it
>>684917911
You are adding the part where you break each gallon down individually. It doesn't say that anywhere. You are wrong.
>>684917969
noted
>>684916512
Nah you're not retarded man, you got it right.
>>684918027
no its explicitly saying
divide 3 gallons of water into 1/3rd gallon cups, how many cups will you get?
9
you always get 9
you're not dividing 3 into 3 groups, you're dividing 3 into groups of 1/3 and the quotient is the number of groups you make which is 9
>>684918027
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3%2F%281%2F3%29
3 divided into groups of 1/3
>>684917911
Even if you allow the part that you pull out of your ass where you treat each gallon as a separate value to divide, you still end up where you started.
The question is 3 divided by a third. 3 is the subject, not the total result of separating each individual item and breaking it into fractions, that would be expressed differently... so suffice it to say this is a problem of intentionally bad formatting.
>>684917896
>>684917576
literally proven right here
>>684918389
take 3 of anything
divide it into groups of 1/3rd
how many groups do you get?
>>684918197
You have it backwards, you're dividing 1/3 into 3, or like you're saying "you're finding out how many 1/3 cups there are in the number 3"
3 thirds is one cup
Another 3 is two
And the last 3 makes three cups. Nine thirds in 3. Amazing.
>>684911106
I know this is bait, but your concept for wording on multiplication and division is incorrect. "Of" means multiplied, not divided.
>>684918423
That is all wrong.
2 divided by 1/2 is 2.
one-half of 2 is 1.
You are all so stupid it hurts. You are just parroting a fucking book that is meant to guide children through school, real geniuses don't need a book and can logically solve real problems.
You are hopeless.
>>684918589
>1/3 into 3
No I explicitly said 3 divided by 1/3
plug it into a calculator
>>684918655
you're fucking dumb
if a teacher in any grade of class saw you put 2 for the answer of 2 divided by a half she'd slap you in the face
>>684918564
take 3 of anything
divide it by 1/3rd of the '3 of anything'
how many of the 3 is 1/3rd?
>>684918589
>>684918197
Wait ignore my reply I completely misread your post, woops
>>684918655
troll upgraded from 3/10 to 7/10 made me whip out paper and do math at 1:15am on a Wednesday morning. Good job
>>684918423
That's a demonstration for a particular case, you asinine twat.
>>684911106
I am just going to throw this out there.
÷ is an archaic math symbol and should not be used if you want people to understand your problem. On a 1 line expression, ÷ is incredibly ambiguous and these "viral math problems" are designed to exploit that.
I wouldn't waste my time with this. Give me a better written problem.
>>684918874
that'll work for every real number
>>684911106
What is division?
Division just means how many times a number goes into another number. For example, 6 divided by 3. There are 2 threes in a 6, so 6/3=2.
3 divided by 1/3 is just saying how many 1/3 can go into 3. And if you add nine 1/3 s then you can see than you are left with 3. Therefore 3 divided by 1/3 is 9 (again, how many times does 1/3 go into 3? 9.)
So let's get back to the problem.
I already proved that 3 divided by 1/3 is 9. So we end up with:
9-9+1=x
And unless you're an absolute type of retard you would see that x is 1.
>(Drops mic)
>>684911106
3/0.33 = 9
lrn2maths
>>684918874
I forgot, the rules of basic arithmetic are different and vary from number to number. That's why 2+2 is 4 but 3+3 goes by its own set of rules and is actually -9
>>684918182
First time I learned something from 4chan holy shit
>>684911106
3/(1/3) = 3*3 = 9. Division is the inverse of multiplication. Therefore, the inverse of the inverse is multiplication. Also, this >>684918564
>>684918589
>>684915222
Top tip trips
>>684918740
Dividing by and dividing into are both the same just flipped you dip
Dividing 6 by 3 equals 2 (as in there are two groups of 3)
Dividing 3 into 6 equals 2 (as in 3 goes into 6 twice)
Its just phrasing
>>684911106
The question is asking how many thirds can you fit into 9? The answer:
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
So 9 of these can fit into 9 (0.33*9 = 9). Are you a baitfag?
>>684918891
this guy gets it
>>684919040
>>684919040
>>684919040
>>684919040
>>684919040
THIS
YOU CANT PROVE THIS WRONG
>>684919245
Sorry, CORRECTION.. I meant to say how many 0.33's can you fit into 3.
>>684919228
>dividing 6 by 3 equals 2
yes
>dividing 3 into 6 equals 2
no its 1/2
3/6 is reduced to 1/2
3/(1/3) = 9
>>684919315
he did a mic drop, is this fucking 2009? He loses just based on that.
>>684919039
Prove it.
>>684919191
youre 27 and you finally pass 8th grade congratulations retard
>>684919603
do you expect me to do this with every real number? We might be here a while, anon
>>684918655
https://youtu.be/07Abat5iBbw
3 / 1/3 just write a big red line in both 3 and null both, what is left is 1, now 9-1+1=9
>>684916809
When you say one third of three, that's three times one third. Three divided by one third is nine. Holy fuck I can't believe this thread is still alive and I'm still getting trolled by it...
>>684911106
You have three apples. You cut each apple into three pieces. How many pieces do you have?
3 ÷ 1/3 == 3 × 3
Anyone else get 4.5?
>>684917529
Watch the video, it explains why plugging the equation as is into a calculator gives you the wrong answer. Try converting the 1/3 to the decimal form, 0.333. This time you'll get 1 (or slightly over 1 when accounting for rounding error because 1/3 is actually 0.333...). The way you entered it, the calculator reads it as 9 - 3/1/3 + 1, which is no correct. 3 ÷ 1/3 = 3 * 3 = 9.
>>684917279
You need order of operations even when the equation is not written in an ambiguous way (also this isn't ambiguous).
>>684917285
This, real math is stuff like algebraic structures and analysis.
>>684919723
I'll cut your work infinitely by limiting it to just positive even multiples of 6
>>684916809
That would be 3 * 1/3 you retard. Learn to math.
Set the statement equal to x, and multiply the entire statement (including x) by 3 to remove the fraction, then solve. Theres more than one way to do it, this is a case where simplification causes problems even though we're always taught simplest form is best.
>>684917576
If you multiply the first fraction over the second fraction, and multiply that by the reciprocal of the second fraction over itself (which is one), the denominator of these two multiplied together is one, and now the numerator is the first fraction multiplied by the reciprocal of the second fraction
>>684911106
you are wrong and here is why.
pay attention in math class next time.
>>684918655
>two divided in half equals itself
>logic
Troll confirmed.
>>684911106
9-3/⅓+1
9-[3/⅓]+1
9-[9]+1
9-[9+1]=1
how fucking hard was that?
jesus just explain it like how every 3rd grade teacher would.
How many times does 1/3 go in to 3? Nine. That's what division is. The quotient of a division problem I s just the number of times the divisor goes into the quotient. Just listen to >>684919040
>>684919717
>8th grade
>Ameridumbs don't learn this at 4th grade
>>684911106
>I don't care what the experts say- 3 ÷ 1/3 is not 9.
pants on head retard
>>684911106
3 ÷ 1/3 = How many times does 1/3 fit into 3?
What you are claiming is 3 * 1/3 = How much is 1/3 of three.
You mixed up the operating logic.
>>684918891
how the hell is a division symbol any more ambiguous than a plus or minus symbol?
as far as I can tell, we all understand what the symbols are referring to. The only dispute is over the fact that dividing by a fraction is the same as multiplying by its reciprocal.
>>684917841
>wanting a formal mathematical proof
>on /b/
x ÷ A/B | B ≠ 0 and A ≠ 0
can be written
x * (A/B)^-1
which can be distributed into
x * (A^-1)/(B^-1)
which can be rationalized as
x * B / A
Or perhaps you'd like
x ÷ A / B -> Bx ÷ A -> Bx/A -> x * B/A
>>684911106
>You and 2 friends each get 1/3 of the apply supply
actually... it's more like you have 1/3 of a friend and it gets 3 apples, how many apples would a whole friend get
>>684916945
There, I fixed it for you Anon.
The rest of you are mostly trolls or morons.
>>684911106
> be apple vendor have 9 apples(9)
> sell one to 3 guys
>watch them split it up and eat it (3 divided by 1/3)
> find an extra apple (+1)
>dude comes back pays for 9 apples
> me, his friends, and the world think hes retarded
> keep shit posting fag
>>684920947
top kek
thanks prof
>>684920866
If this guy can't understand basic math, I'm astounded he thinks he is ready for a mathematical proof
everyone just get the fuck out of this thread. we wasted so much time on this one guy about basic fucking 2nd grade arithmetic. you could have went and fapped and gone to sleep already. or do something else that's more productive than trying to prove a clear troll wrong about fucking math.
>>684921186
Oh shit
I forgot what I came on /b/ for in the first place
welp off to a loli thread, thanks /b/ro
Proof dividing by a fraction is multiplying by the reciprocal
(a/b)/(c/d)
Rationalize by multiplying by reciprocal
{(a/b)÷(c/d)} × {(d/c)÷(d/c)}
This gets us
{(a/b) × (d/c)} / {(c/d) × (d/c)}
Bottom part simplifies to one because
d/d = 1
and
c/c = 1
And we get
(a/b) × (d/c)
Otherwise known as multiplying by reciprical
>>684921337
>tfw no Loli threads
>>684911106
1/3 goes into 3 9 times. 1/3+1/3+1/3+1/3+1/3+1/3+1/3+1/3+1/3=9/3=3
>>684921548
Just go
You have a good brain why waste it here
For anyone stupid enough to answer "1":
3 ÷ 1/3
3 * 1/3
Explain how these can both equal "1".
Answer: they can't, because they are opposites, and 3 ÷ 1/3 = 9.
>>684921554
degenerate
>>684921086
"But how do you KNOW FOR SURE?"
You're challenging people who have never learned formal logic to prove a mathematical assumption that was proven in antiquity and accepted as a ground truth. Get out.
>>684911106
In the same sense that you get 4 25 cent pieces from $1.
>>684911106
When you divide something by something, you have to flip the fraction you're dividing by so that 3 divided by 1/3 becomes 3 X 3/1 so that you end up with 9-9+1 =0+1=1
>>684921086
Ok smart guy. Go back to your discret math with ducks textbook. You've got exams to fail.
>inb4 I don't study at summertime.
Troll or retard, this thread is bullshit.
>>684920767
This is why we don't use ÷
both of these could be seen as correct with vastly different answers. Rewrite the question with less ambiguity.
>>684921674
you're baiting tho right
3 / (1/3) = 3 * (3/1)
3/0.33333 = 3*3
9 = 9
2
Holy fuck, I just got 1/3 dumber by reading this shit. I'm shaking with rage. I'm going to fucking bed.
>>684921548
You did not state what a,b,c,d represent. Integers, reals, naturals etc.
>>684921737
Wait, did you even click the right reply?
I THINK you mean I'm asking someone to write a mathematical proof for something universally accepted. I'm not. I figured the proof out on my own once I was old enough to wonder about stuff like that. I'm good, thanks.
>>684921945
Well where did you get your insults? The bad insult store? go back to failing your insults tests, you're a duck textbook.
>>684911106
80% of people here are literally retarded and the public school system has failed.
sage in all fields. Going to fucking bed now.
9
>>684922237
>writes a math problem
>rewrites first math problem, this time completely abandoning a minus symbol and then implying parenthesis that didn't exist in the original problem
>could be seen as correct
Maybe through beer googles. Hand over the keyboard, anon. I think you['re drunk.
>>684922505
You're the only one in this thread who's won. Congrats.
>>684922795
Donald trump called. He's running out of fascism and innumeracy, you vapid burger.
>>684922540
Clearly they'll be integers cause rationals or fractional numbers just expand the thing. In this case
a=3 b=1 c=1 d=3
>>684922795
Show the proof you figured out. Extra points if it's original.
>>684923203
>burger
>>684923439
3 divided by 1/3 = 1
9 - 1 = 8
8 + 1 = 9
HOLY FUCK JUST LEAVE WHY BOTHER WASTING YOUR TIME
Why arguing over that shit?
It's clearly made up to fuck with you people.
See how whiny faggots you are. That's even worse than on facebook.
Why not simply use the same type of operator through the same equation?
Yeah, because you should kill yourself in fights over who is wrong and who is right.
Just throw the equation back at the guy who made it, cause its fucking disgusting to use different types of operators in an equation. Thats not like a real mathematican would write an equation.
We should simply ignore it, because we know how to math, and something like this should be ignored to nonexistence. It's not the art of math, this is a filthy and sigusting equation, which i don't ever touch!
>>684923535
Kek. Goodnight snookums.
>>684923547
Holy shit you fucking retard
>>684912732
/thread
>>684923439
3/(1/3)=9
3(1/(1/3))=9
^1/.33333=3^
3(3)=9
I don't think this exact version has been used in this thread yet
>>684923890
Not a proof so your point is moot
>>684924059
Oh right, sorry. Just pretend this next part is tacked on to the end then.
3(3)=9=3*3/1
There, official proof by equality.
>>684912475
/thread
>>684911106
>experts
more like middle schoolers
>>684924302
u=faggit.
QED
>>684924302
A/(1/B)=C [B>1, A>1]
A(1/(1/B))=9
^1/1/B=B^
A(B)=A*B/1
There, I adapted it for all integers.
>>684924906
>A(1/(1/B))=9
Kek.
>>684925250
Fuck
>whoopsies my bad
>>684917529
do you even wolfram bro?
gotta keep that fraction separated
>>684911106
>>684911269
>>684916809
>>684917213
>>684917358
>>684917896
>>684918799
(Too many to cite them all)
The calculator, and most of the people in this thread,say the answer is 9. Go back to school, faggots.
>>684925643
Don't disagree with a calculator it only makes them angry
>>684926259
I just said I agreed with the calculator
>>684926494
So stop being fags and accept the truth. Its 0.(9) and considered 1 by the calculator.
Jesus fucking christ... It's no wonder why Bernie Sanders just won the Oregon primary.
>>684911269
You're not sharing 3 apples with 3 people, you're dividing 3 apples into thirds. That will give you 9 of 1/3 apple slices.
x = x
multiply and divide one side by y:
x = y * (x / y)
divide each side by (x / y), this cancels on the right hand side:
x / (x / y) = y
divide each side by x:
1 / (x / y) = y / x
ergo, division by a fraction is the same as multiplication by its reciprocal
