Posted by Pazx

"basically the definition of division"

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define%3A+division ok.

Have a read of the knowyourmeme page Pimpsy, should clear things up for you.

Clear things up for me? This is getting ******ed. I clicked your link. "In the expression a ÷ b = c, a is called the dividend or numerator, b the divisor or denominator and the result c is called the quotient" Now, where have we heard numerator and denominator from? Hmm, I have simply no idea.

Also just for kicks: "Any of these forms can be used to display a fraction."

On another note: this is taken straight out of an old German book called Teutsche Algebra by Johann H. Rahn, way back in 1659. This is the first known use of the obelus, ÷, to represent division:


http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?T%5Cdiv%20GG+1%20=%20%5Cfrac%7BT%7D%7BGG+1%7D (Unsupported image host)

Just another thing, why do scientific calculators have an obelus, but output a "/" sign? Another strange thing. Sure, the obelus is a representation of division as a whole but i find that peculiar given that picture which is basically an extraction from the groundings of division itself. I think this whole recent conception that the obelus is different than the solidus (or slash, “/”) is just bonkers and a product of the over simplification of elementary education.  

ew math  

Posted by Wolfy

ew math

ew spam  

Tl;dr: Pazx assumes I'm stupid because he doesn't understand my argument, the obelus, ÷, is the same thing as the solidus, /, as seen in the groundings of division; and cronos argument stands because of this. You cant solve an equation algebraically and have another answer simply because the division sign is represented in a different way. That is beyond me that elementary schools teach it that way. Also, you could treat it like a fraction as so and solve it to get 2 this way:

http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?48%5Cdiv2%289+3%29=%5Cfrac%7B48%7D%7B2%289+3%29%7D=%5Cfrac%7B48%7D%7B24%7D=2 (Unsupported image host)  

Posted by iHot

Pimpsy! You sir are a genius! I used pemdas for this problem and the answer is 2!

You don't use pedmas for a problem like this considering the way it is written is so awkward. You need to solve it algebraically, as that way the answer 2 is the only one that fits. Also, your sarcasm is horrible. Please, if you want to be an ass and not contribute anything to this conversation, leave.  

Wasn't being sarcastic **** for brains sorry for interfering.  

Posted by iHot

Wasn't being sarcastic **** for brains sorry for interfering.

Well, you've certainly proven that you're an asshole that doesn't know what you're talking about!  

Posted by Pimpsy G.

Well, you've certainly proven that you're an asshole that doesn't know what you're talking about!

Ah **** never mind it's still 288. Plus if you haven't noticed no one really reads this thread (just before you go and waste anymore of your time).  

Posted by iHot

Ah **** never mind it's still 288. Plus if you haven't noticed no one really reads this thread (just before you go and waste anymore of your time)

Saying, "Its still 288" doesn't do anything. I dont even know why you posted this.  

I'm the only one still posting.  

Whatever. This thread is getting my nerves really fried. I haven't gotten this pissed off at somebody by their mannerisms in an online debate for a long time.  

Did you not read what Rezon posted? http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

If one uses multiplication before division (PEMDAS being especially popular in the United States), the problem would be solved like this:
48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
48 ÷ 24=
2
However, solving the problem like this would be considered erroneous because multiplication and division hold equal precedence.

And the way Crono did it:

Returning to the original problem, if one utilizes the principles of implied multiplication, then “2(9+3)” gets higher precedence than the explicit “48/2,” and would be solved like this:
48 ÷ 2(9+3)=
48 ÷ 2(12)=
48 ÷ 24=
2
However, there is a lack of consensus on the value of implied multiplication.

I asked my grade 12 specialist maths teacher, who got 2 straight away. I told her to look harder, she grabbed a calculator and came to the conclusion it's 288. She said she got 2 originally because she was thinking about algebra and factorising to begin with.

It's poorly written, I think we all see that, but the working should be as follows:

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
24 * 12=
288

If there was a fraction involved the answer may or may not be different.  

Posted by Pazx

Did you not read what Rezon posted? http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

I asked my grade 12 specialist maths teacher, who got 2 straight away. I told her to look harder, she grabbed a calculator and came to the conclusion it's 288. She said she got 2 originally because she was thinking about algebra and factorising to begin with.

If there was a fraction involved the answer may or may not be different.

I read it as soon as he posted the link to it. And you still need to solve it like this, because regardless its a division sign and the rest that follows after the obelus, ÷, is the denominator. You can't base how to solve this off of simple elementary logic used to guide people into advanced math. (As the logic treats the obelus differently than the slash "/" to make it less complicated and to avoid simplifying binomials) Also, you need to put parentheses around the denominator when entering it into any calculator. Again, this is what I stand by.

http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?48%5Cdiv2%289+3%29=%5Cfrac%7B48%7D%7B2%289+3%29%7D=%5Cfrac%7B48%7D%7B24%7D=2 (Unsupported image host)  

GG, this can go to the dogs now.  

Is there any way to block this thread from my view lol? Because I know I'm so closed minded when it comes to debates that as soon as someone else posts I'm going to be glued to this thread again.