![.eJwVzMENwyAMAMBdGAAHhxCcbRBBBCnECLuvqru3_d7j3uY1b3OYS3XIAXA2yTxPK8oz1WIrc71LGk1s5g5JNeWrl0cFHLmdEHfvEGMIIUZA54PDhYi2leLqf9T6vxlPNZ8vwboh[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/RvgDt4b.png ".eJwVzMENwyAMAMBdGAAHhxCcbRBBBCnECLuvqru3_d7j3uY1b3OYS3XIAXA2yTxPK8oz1WIrc71LGk1s5g5JNeWrl0cFHLmdEHfvEGMIIUZA54PDhYi2leLqf9T6vxlPNZ8vwboh[1].png")
I bet you dumb fucks cant even figure out this simple math problem.
fuck off it's clearly -1
6/6
>>711772531
it's 7
>>711772531
1. Eat muh dick faget
9 obviously.
>>711772531
the answer is clearly 2 because there is more 2 than any other number
>>711772725
9 is right
>>711772666
trips confirm
>>711772531
6/2(2+1)
6/2(3)
6/6
1
four thirds
>>711772531
the answer is fuck you cunt faggot XD
>>711772531
you faggots can't even solve this
the sum of all the numbers 2^(-n) from n = 1 to infinity
Can somebody actually explain how to do this?
I'm at a loss.
>>711772843
No. Parenthesis first, you are right.
But then Division/Multiplication is applied from left to right.
Then Addition/Subtraction from left to right (none here)
6 / 2 * (2 + 1)
6 / 2 * 3
3 * 3
9
>>711772843
No, you fucking uneducated autist. You divide 6 with 2, and use the distributive property, giving 6 + 2. It's clearly fucking 8, retard.
Niner
>>711772531
PEMDAS you cunts
6/2(2+1)
6/2(3)
3(3)=9
cunts
>>711773195
your mom's a cunt lol xDDDDDDDDDDDDd
>>711773091
Someone's really mad. You seem to be a little bit autistic based on the fit you just had. Not to mention your oh so excellent math skills. How about a puzzle and some sonic the hedgehog?
>>711773195
Well, if you want to use PEMDAS
Multiplication BEFORE division
6 / 2 * (3)
6 / 6
1
9; it's in fact the same as (6/2)(2+1)
How have I fallen yet again for the bait
>>711773348
No. It's PEMDAS as in P, E, M/D, A/S.
How do people keep getting 1 it's 9
>>711773319
I'm not fucking angry. You're fucking angry, you dumb faggot. I bet you can't even get any pussy with the lack of education you have. You didn't even try to fight my argument back with real math skills. Go eat a dick.
>>711773348
this is shit bait and you are a shit person
>>711773429
Exactly my point.
M/D
Nice try.
>>711773348
Thats not how it works...
The answer is 9
>>711773521
I can tell you're getting grumpy. Go to bed, you've got school tomorrow.
>>711773577
multiplication and division aren't distinguished as one having priority over the other. it's whichever's leftmost.
you will find nothing saying otherwise.
>>711773429
What are the exponents in the equation anyway? Some people think it's just 6/2(2+1) while others think it's (6/2)(2+1). Which is it?
>>711773727
They're the same, faggot
>>711773656
fuck you fuck YOU!!! KILL YOURSELF!
>>711773718
Agree to disagree.
The problem is poorly written anyway.
>>711773812
Not sure if horrendously shit tier new fag or horrendously shit tier troll pretending to be newfag. Either way, you're aren't triggering me. I'm sat here laughing at how much of a fool you are.
>>711773919
No it isn't, its written perfectly fine, this isn't lit where things are left up to interpretation, there is a certain way to do things
>>711773727
They're equivalent.
6/2*(2+1) = 6/2(2+1) = (6/2)(2+1) = ((6)/(2))((2)+(1)) = (((6)/(2))((2)+(1)))
>>711773077
You changed the format when you added the multiply symbol
6/2(2+1)=1
6/2*(2+1)=9
To further clarify
Six divided by two, (two plus one)'s
Not the same as
Six halves times (two + one)
Though this confusion is why it would be more appropriate to use a vertical format
I'm siding with 9 here. The problem is expressed in an odd way. Usually division is expressed with ÷ rather than /. This confuses the denominator of the fraction. I think it's 6 halves though, which leads to 9 as the answer.
>>711774291
in english please?
>>711774291
(1+1)(1+1) === (1+1) * (1+1)
>>711774094
Not sure what you're getting at with the lit remark. If this question was properly written this wouldn't even be a topic.
I don't see us reaching an agreement, so again, agree to disagree.
>>711774291
6/2*(2+1) => Six divided by two times two plus one.
6/2(2+1) => Siv divided by two times two plus one.
Both give 9, the * symbol is implied when using parentheses, you dumb fuck
>>711774542
The * symbol implies multiplication.
The parenthesis implies a coefficient relationship, which, yes, in *most* situations can be treated the same.
>>711774410
>>711774542
Get an education. You fucks
>>711774666
Thank you
>>711774753
Even In your shitty pemdas you multiply first you twat
>>711773020
Brackets
Exponents
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
>>711772986
1...
>>711775148
kill yourself
>>711774753
And multiplication comes before division you retard
6/2(2+1)
6/2*3
6/6=1
Anyone who gets anything else is a massive retard.
JESUS how long has it been since you've been to school, in the last 4 characters of PEMDAS the order doesnt matter in pairs. Meaning that you can solve it in the order given>>711775070
>>711775323
I hate to break it to you, but what you learn in 2nd grade math class is not universal.
This question is written ambiguously, thus both 9 and 1 are valid answers, depending on the method used.
The mistakes do not lie in the solutions, but rather the problem itself.
>>711775316
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
>>711775148
Is it 1? Or is it infinitely close to 1?
>>711775471
No, the only valid solution is 9.
I can't believe we are STILL having this argument. People who can't accept how equations work, you are just like Christians trying to prove God.
>>711775520
> "1/2x equals 1/(2x), not (1/2)x"
Directly from the page you linked.
first you do parenthesis, (2+1)=3
Then you multiply 6/2(3)=18/2
18/2=9
Its a fraction, you cant multiply the 3 by the 2 if its not in a parenthesis.
Uneducated americans. Meh.
>>711775520
>using Wikipedia as a source of reference
you're all a bunch of dumbass nigger faggots. it didnt matter in grade school, it doesn't matter now. go spend your time solving real problems.
>>711775323
Still uses the bullshit pemdas from elementary school he 2 is written as a coefficient to the (2+1)
Which should be read as (2*(2+1)) you fuck twit you can't just pull them apart because you dropped out of highschool
>>711775904
autist kys
>>711775732
"However, in some of the academic literature"
Which OP's question is clearly not part of.
If you're gonna quote, quote all the relevant parts.
>>711775471
this
the problem itself is not clear enough.
it fails to distinguish between
6/(2(2+1))=1
and
6/2(2+1)=9
>>711775316
actually in just goes in order after Parenthesis and Exponent. Multiplication or Division whichever comes first same with Add or Subtract.
PEMDAS so the person you tried to belittle is actually smarter then you are -.- no im not same person just saw your bad math while scrolling through /b
>>711775776
Is that better?
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=6%2F2(1%2B2)
>>711776019
nigger
The answer is 9.
I have a bachelors in Chemical Engineering. I know how math works.
>>711776026
>than*
Your argument is invalid.
>>711776156
cuckold shitlib faggot nigger
>>711775732
Lol it's because their shitty teachers didnt teach them how to understand coefficients
>>711776007
Oh, my apologies for paying attention to academic literature.
I take it your elementary school math education makes you an expert who knows better?
>>711776191
>This mad at being mad at math
>>711772531
6/2(2+1)
6/2*3
6/6
1
This is the only valid answer
2+1=3
6/2=3
3x3=9
>>711776280
>this retarded
Look at all the retard Trump supporters struggle with math
>>711776357
look at hillary clinton lose
>>711776357
I bet they think math supports abortions up to birth
>>711776312
You have the right answer, but your work is wrong.
6/2(2+1)
6/2(3)
6/6
1
Working from 6/2*3 you get:
6/2*3
3*3
9
Careful!
1
P.E.M.D.A.S BITCHES!!!
>>711776357
>>711775616
The same fucking thing you pedant.
Just like .999 repeating is 1, so is that.
everyone in this thread should kill themselves immediately
>>711776438
That depends whether you consider (2+1) to be multiplied by 6 or by 2. There's a reason why this divide sign is completely useless, it it was a fraction then anyone in this thread could come up with the correct answer.
>>711776528
We accept them as the same so that math does not break down, but in actuality there is a difference.
>>711776528
Not true.
.999 repeating is not the same as 1, but it is mathematically equivalent to 1.
i'll show yo wat up
6 /2(2+1)
6/2(3)
prenthesis first so you bultiply 6 by 3
6*3/2
alderba so do madsap
devison go
6 * 1.5
9 easy peasy
>>711776644
The (2+1) is a coefficient to the 2. This is not ambiguous.
Its 9
Go put it in a calculator
6/2(2+1)=
6/2(3)=
6/2*3=
6*2^(-1)*3=
9
Look it's fucking simple
6/2(2+1)
First distribute the coefficient
6/(4+2)
Then add the inside of the parenthesis
6/6
Then solve
6/6 =1
>>711776927
yo no distribue unless it's an aldebreic equaton
>>711772725
>>711772795
>>711773077
>>711773195
>>711773595
>>711774062
you need to go back..
to school
>>711776707
>>711776727
>Not true
>Goes into semantics
For engineers, they are the same
IE in the real world, they are the same. Just like pure mathematicians preach about 1/0 being impossible but its functionally infinity.
>>711777013
im too tired
>>711776927
Be prepared for the army of middle schoolers who just learned PEMDAS to get mad and say you're wrong.
>>711777031
Nice b8
>>711777013
You could distribute, but you would have to distribute the whole fraction, 6/2 (6 halves).
It's 1 faggots
>>711777051
Language does not solely exist for engineering texts.
Saying that ".999 repeating *is* one" is simply not true in all contexts.
>>711777170
The 6 is not a part of the coefficient.
>>711777094
Well if they were taught properly they'd know the first rule of parenthesis is pemdas is to distribute any coefficents
>>711772632
>>711772837
>>711772843
>>711772905
>>711773348
>>711776312
>>711776457
>>711776927
>>711777191
Do you shits even try?
>>711777271
Its true in every context that matters sperglord
obv. 9 i passed calc. 2
>>711772531
6/(2+1)=2
(6/2)+(1/2) = 2
0 = (36/4) + (2/4) - 2
0 = (36/4) + (2/4) - (8/4)
x = -(2/4) +- (sqrt((2/4)+4(36/4)(8/4)))/(2(36/4))
x = 5, x=-3
>>711777170
If it were a fraction it would be grouped in parenthesis for a horizontal format, get a proper education and get back to me
>>711777395
Matters to you perhaps. I suppose there's no point in arguing, as you're clearly too dense to see outside of your own field.
What the fuck is pemdas?
>>711777094
lo l do t no pemdasz
>>711777170
6h alkf is 3
>>711777271
shut rhe fuck up nit even part of questobn
>>711777360
no its not peraths only work on aldgebric equans witch is madsap pemdas basc word
>>711777549
amreecan bemdas , parenthes instged og braks
log gonin g to bad now
>>711777522
Faggot, the answer is not 1
I browse /b/ all the time no stress, but this thread has me genuinely worried that people are going to wind up believing that the answer is 9.
Education is important, folks!
>>711777524
No, matters to anyone in the real world. Do you understand that pure math is functionally useless? Proofs are bullshit constructs so that you can flex your math brain while real men do work that matters.
kat is queen
>>711777706
It is 9 dumbass
>711772843
you didn't pass pre-algebra did you?
>>711777777
get in her faggots
>>711777831
learn to link anfggdz]-[p
>>711773091
>It's clearly 8, retard
>8
lolwut
>>711777745
80c + 2y = 46
80c = 46 - 2y
c = (46 - 2y)/80
c = -(1/40)y + (23/40)
70c + 3y = 47
70(-(1/40)y + (23/40)) + 3y = 47
Gross I give up why'd you give such a sloppy problem anon?
>>711777745
X=4.4
Y=5.4
>>711777745
8x+2y=46
y=23-4x
7x+3(23-4x)=47
7x+69-12x=47
-5x=-22
5x=22
x=4.4
y=23-4x
y=23-4(4.4)
y=23-17.6
y=5.4
>>711778106
>c = (46 - 2y)/80
>c = -(1/40)y + (23/40)
>70c + 3y = 47
>70(-(1/40)y + (23/40)) + 3y = 47
what the fuck were you trying to do?
>>711778307
Solve for y, then plug in to find c.
6/2(2+1)=8<3 =
6/8+7^b/1 = 6+1 =
b + 1 - g/7^1>6 =
9
>>711778106
>>711778370
Anon, are you dyslexic or something?
>>711778444
No need to be rude, but I see that it's x now
My bad
>>711778106
kek
6/2(2+1)
6/2(3)
3(3)
3*3
9
Can somebody explain to me how to use wolfram alpha?
I want to try and solve this problem for myself. I'll let you know if I get an anwer
>>711778807
No you fucking faggot
6/2(2+1)
6/2×(2+1)
6/2×3
3×3
9
9
>>711778145
>8x+2y=46
>y=23-4x
wut
>>711772531
what's the contour integral of western europe?
0, because all the poles are in the east.
>>711779076
You just type it in
Also, >>711777372 already gave the answer
>>711779174
8x+2y=46
4x+y=23
y=23-4x
>>711779312
I don't get it
>>711772797
How long did you wait to post this pic...?
9
>>711777745
8x+2y=46
4x+y=23
12x+3y=69
5x+0y=22
X=22/5=4.4
Y=23-22(4/5)
Too tired to finish the fraction in my head.
>>711779174
Anon subtracted 8x from both sides then divided both sides by 2 in order to solve for y.
>>711778370
Use matrix row reductions, it's much easier.
Guys I checked in Wolfram Alpha. You can all stop arguing and go to sleep now
>>711779361
Divide both sides by 2, subtract 4x over to the RHS.
>>711779641
>wrong font
Nice b8 m8
>>711779845
It's the iPhone app m8
>>711772531
tl;dr OP is a giant fucking faggot
The problem is that this is written ambiguously, as probably five or six people have already stated. It can be represented in multiple forms, and OP, the faggot he is, decided to choose the most ambiguous one.
6/2(2+1)
Which can be written as
6/(2(2+1))
6/2*(2+1)
6÷2(2+1)
6÷2*(2+1)
From this we can also write it as (Forgive me for the shitty equation bullshit)
6
--------------
2(2+1)
This equation gives an output of one, but if it's written as
6
- (2+1)
2
Then the answer would be 9.
However, the way the equation is presented makes it look like that 2 is the coefficient of (2+1), and therefore produces (4+2) which leads to 6. Solving the equation this way gives an output of 1.
So can we all agree that OP is a giant fag now?
>>711779940
Lol just wait until the BEDMAS idiots come in and tell you it's division before multiplication.
I'm with you, but nobody's ever going to agree here.
>>711779641
LITERALLY FUCK YOU
