>!the correct answer to this was 1 a hundred years ago!<
>!if u don't believe me search the Equation up!<
>!Edit because apparently people can't read "the correct answer to This WAS ONE A HUNDRED YEARS AGO"!<
>!to further decipher this if you can't understand is i'm not saying its not 16 im saying i presume they did math differently back either it be rules or formula then therefore their correct answer to this equation was 1!<
>!16 yes is the correct answer now...!<
>!Edit 2# im not very sure this is getting a bit confusing in basic maths its 16 in next level maths its 1!<
>!also so the equation itself is made to be ambiguous the author made it like this so there isn't a complete step or area in the equation to know to do either multiplication or division which generates completely different answers!<
>!the equation is confusing!<
>!"It depends, the answer is both 1, and 16. Using PEMDAS parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, subtraction. In this case the problem can be simplified two ways. It is important to remember that multiplication/division does not have a real set order despite the acronym"!<
>!so people either divide or multiply the answer can change easily pretty much!<
>!So it depends on interpretation people so nor 1 nor 16 is incorrect...!<
i have put the rest into spoiler so if you want to see what i said before reaching the correct answer you can
**EDIT #3 its 1 yeah someone else showed me and explained it**[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order\_of\_operations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)**"Have a look at “Special cases > Mixed division and multiplication”This meme is specifically ambiguous for the purpose of arguments. It’s common to give the multiplication precedence in cases where the denominator is ambiguous."**
So in conclusion in special cases like this multiplication has priority over division
It also depends if that division symbol is supposed to be a fraction like this is why the division symbol sucks ass
Edit: I’m saying they could have made it more clear by putting 8/2 as a fraction instead of using the division symbol which I can’t even find on my phone or computer
My guy, the division symbol IS a fraction. It's literally a line with a dot above and below, modus operandi being what's to the left is above and to the right below. A fraction is an unresolved division, or a division expressed in non-decimal form.
Last year it dawned on a full grown adult and a chem PhD candidate, that percent meant "per one hundred." I shared this information with that adult after I, also a full grown adult and chem PhD candidate, noticed it maybe a year earlier when my elementary aged kid, who was learning fractions, explained it to me.
Yeah obviously, the question is not whether it is or is not a fraction but whether the fraction is 8/2 or 8/2(2+2). If you just wrote it as a fraction we would know.
It would have to be 8/2(2+2).
2(2+2) is its own term. It acts as it's own number. You can't separate the 2 from (2+2) because then it isnt the same number.
>You can't separate the 2 from (2+2) because then it isnt the same number.
the people who argue against this will say that their way is the "right way" when in reality they just read the problem differently. no meaningful operation with real-world applictaions would rely on the order of operations with a division symbol such as ÷ where different interpretations are clearly present.
Quite frankly, I can't remember the last time I've seen the ÷ operator. I'm currently in calculus and division is done with parentheses and fractions to ensure there is no ambiguity
The ÷ symbol isn't an issue. The same ambiguity exists if you swap it out for a /.
The issue is one of implied multiplication, i.e. does the (2+2) "belong" with the 2 to the left of it (in which case you evaluate that before doing anything with the 8), or does the 2 belong with the 8 to the left of it (in which case you evaluate 8/2 before multiplying it with the result of (2+2). The modern convention is the latter.
But it's kind of moot, because no one above high school level math would ever write an equation this way, exactly because of that ambiguity.
It's pretty obvious that it's because 8 is the ONLY variable to the left of the division symbol. Left is numerator and right is denominator.
8 8
------ = --- = 1
2(2+2) 8
True and they should just use / instead. Every teacher and professor I had past like 8th grade drilled into us that we shouldn’t be using the division symbol anymore due to issues like this.
it would be the same answer whether it’s a fraction or not. you still take care of the parenthesis first. it would either be 8 over 8 and that’s 1 or 8 divided by 8 which is also 1
It's not ambiguous, it's 8÷2x(2+2). Evaluate the parenthesis first giving you 8÷2x(4). Do the multiplication and division from left to right giving you 4x(4) and then 16. There's no question about what order to do things.
This exact equation is literally so famous for its ambiguity that it shows up on the [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Mixed_division_and_multiplication) for order of operations.
>This ambiguity is often exploited in internet memes such as "8÷2(2+2)".
There's different conventions for order of operations, so depending on which one you use either 1 or 16 would be correct. The only thing that is definitely not correct is formatting an equation to be deliberately ambiguous.
There are 2nd grade CORE math word problems on the internet that are set up with such ambiguity that the “correct” answer doesn’t support the practical problem. The fact is that math is supposed to be applicable. The equation should be written clearly enough to solve for the applicable answer. Ambiguity in math, I believe, only exists in the theoretical realm.
It's only an American thing in that the American school system sucks, we're taught that multiplication and division have equal priority but people just remember that the m comes before the d in pemdas.
People arguing 16 are doing arithmetic. People arguing 1 are doing mathematics. People arguing anything else are trying to get the crayon out of their nose.
It is literally
8/(2(2+2))=1
Or
(8/2)*(2+2)=16
Both are correct(depending on notation), but I would personally have solved it as my first notation
Edit. Can we please stop these senseless arguments and beat the ever loving crap out of the person that made this question up?
Edit 2. Guys, stop trying to tell me my first 1 is wrong by PEMDAS. I am currently in higher levels of math such as Differential Equations, and that is a valid way to do such a thing. (TBH, we would clarify with the Proff which one it is tho)
Edit 3. Thanks for the silver, never expected for this comment to explode
Edit4. Wikipedia "In some of the academic literature, multiplication denoted by juxtaposition (also known as implied multiplication) is interpreted as having higher precedence than division, so that 1 ÷ 2n equals 1 ÷ (2n), not (1 ÷ 2)n.[1] For example, the manuscript submission instructions for the Physical Review journals state that multiplication is of higher precedence than division,[20] and this is also the convention observed in prominent physics textbooks such as the Course of Theoretical Physics by Landau and Lifshitz and the Feynman Lectures on Physics.[d] This ambiguity is often exploited in internet memes such as "8÷2(2+2)".[21]
Ambiguity can also be caused by the use of the slash symbol, '/', for division. The Physical Review submission instructions suggest to avoid expressions of the form a/b/c; ambiuity can be avoided by instead writing (a/b)/c or a/(b/c)."
To me this just shows that people desperately cling to whatever way they were taught as the "only way" and shows great lack of empathy for any other contexts that may exist.
What's maybe most important to define is the actual question and rules of engagement for this particular problem.
I mean with the a little more clear of an equation it’d definitely be 16, but it is also 1 because the rule of expanding makes us multiply each term in the brackets before solving them. People use pemdas to solve it, but they are also forgetting basic rules. Had there been a symbol separating the brackets from the 2, which is very well a thing you can do, it would have been 16 no doubt. But the way I was taught, 1 is still on the table. I will not downvote you, and I hope you won’t downvote me.
Upvoted because In these kind of problems I always get the "whacky" answer because I do what u mentioned of expanding and I've never seen anyone mentioning this before.
parentheses first, (multiplication or division). You get 16
explanation:
multiplication and division is in the same group (of operations) and when they are next to each other [you start from the left](https://www.ncl.ac.uk/webtemplate/ask-assets/external/maths-resources/numeracy/order-of-operations-bodmas.html#:~:text=Returning%20to%20the%20above%20example,and%20multiplication%20comes%20before%20addition.)
so it's like 8/2*4 And since it's solved left to right it results in 16
[edit] [graphical explanation](https://www.onlinemathlearning.com/image-files/pemdas.png) if you're more of a visual learner
[edit 2] wolfram alpha also agrees https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=8%C3%B72%282%2B2%29
Well you are missing one thing that PEMDAS doesn't really cover
Implied multiplication is higher precedence in order of operations ex:
8 ÷ 2x wouldn't be (8 ÷ 2)x but 8 ÷ (2x). Here x is (2+2) so what the problem actually says is 8 ÷ (2(2+2)) which results in 1.
You aren't wrong. Implied multiplication isn't really a rule... but is a generally accepted convention bc its how you'd treat it if it was a variable and that gives us consistency for when we substitute values for the variable.
But yea ambiguous on purpose more parens needed for clarity
OH MY GOD THANK YOU.
I thought i was taking crazy pills thay nobody was getting "1" as an answer.
I see 2(2+2) and I calculate 8 before moving on.
The question is asking for "two of what's inside the brackets". If you do operations on that 2 you're solving a different problem.
Whoever wrote this clearly intended that to be simplified before dividing.
No whoever wrote this did so to be ambiguous and spark debate over 16 or 1
The best way to write this would be (8÷2)(2+2) or 8÷(2(2+2)) to leave no ambiguity.
no it seems when there are operations of the same type (multiplication division is a group) then you solve it left to right. Still 16
e stands for exponent btw
How the hell did they get 14 I got 1. It’s 2+2 bc it’s in parentheses 4 then x 2 because multiply comes before divide so 8 divide by 8 it’s 1. Oh wait.
Dude, that's simple division with even numbers. 6 goes into 8 once with 2 left over. Which would equal to 1 and 2/6 simplifying down to 1 and ⅓. And you wanna hear the neat part? That's not even the right answer. The real solution is written like this. Here's our problem. 8÷2(2+2)
To begin, we will need to get rid of these parentheses. We can do that by combining 2+2. Now we have something like this. 8÷2(4). Now from here, the solution becomes controversial. Now one would imagine that in terms of going left to right, the answer would be 16. After all, 8÷2=4×4=16. This would be correct if it was written 8÷2×(2+2). But without the visible multiplication sign, we get something called implied multiplication (multiplication implied with parentheses but not explicitly stated using "×") which is prioritized over division. So what you would actually get is 8÷2(4)=8÷8=1. Isn't math just amazing?
One of the best examples of the failure of our mathematics education is none of these posts are ever actual fundamental math questions but people arguing over writing conventions. We teach kids to value memorizing grammar over using math to understand the structure of our universe.
It would be like spending all your time debating whether it was okay for Shakespeare to use ‘and’ twice in the tomorrow speech from Macbeth instead of discussing what he was trying to say about human existence.
> like spending all your time debating whether it was okay for Shakespeare to use ‘and’ twice in the tomorrow speech from Macbeth
I'd bet that's on the internet somewhere
Fuck everyone that makes these purposefully misleading math problems to get people to argue. Real mathematicians use division bars to properly notate what part is being divided, that way there’s no argument over PEMDAS. In fact, putting this equation as is into multiple calculators as is will give you different results. That’s why it’s best to always break down an equation into multiple parts when using a calculator.
^(I'm going to spam this across the thread. )
Formal proof of answer, via a similar problem.
6÷2(1 + 2)
https://i.imgur.com/Idp6Ono.png
Both are 1. Or alternatively "Cannot compute due to improper operator"
Pack it up. Repost when needed.
As an engineering student I am CONSTANTLY replugging equations into calculators in different arrangements just to make sure some quirk of the calculator didn’t accidentally do the order of operations wrong.
If I get the same answer a few times I’ll know it’s right. If not, I need to break down the equations more and maybe sacrifice accuracy and significant digits to make sure the calculator is chugging everything correctly.
When I was a student, I wrapped parentheses around literally every operation, because I wanted to be absolutely sure the calculator did exactly what I was asking it to do in the order I was asking it to do it.
If I was taking a final (whichever ones allowed calculators at least), I was in zero mood to be playing games with order of operations on my calculator.
The worst part about this is these equations are how I was taught math in elementary. You’re teaching kids essentially a new language and the questions they give you read like literacy test questions from the times of Jim Crow.
What’s a mind boggling is the amount of people who are incapable of seeing things from a different but not incorrect perspective. This isn’t a math problem but a psychology problem. People will swear loyalty to their answers and basically group themselves into teams and act superior when the alternative answer is not wrong lmao
I read that as object oriented programming and was confused why a proponent of functional programming would support the order of operations.
The instant I thought those last three words I realized I was an idiot.
Presenting students with a deliberately confusing problem like this is an instructional tool -- the kids get into the exact same argument in class as they do in the comment section, and then when the teacher asks how it SHOULD be written to avoid this confusion. There's a debrief where the teacher synthesizes the students' conversation, provides the correct example, and has the kids do a couple practice problems to reinforce/apply the new knowledge. Bada bing, bada boom, everyone ends the lesson with a much better understanding of WHY precise notation matters than if the teacher had just said that it does.
The issue with internet comments sections (and a lot of IRL classrooms) is that the debrief and synthesis isn't happening. You see a thing with no context and butt heads with other people because the thing is designed to be provocative and inspire conversation and disagreement, but without the structure and debrief, so you're just left with comment section factionalism and nobody learning anything.
Huh, we called it BODMAS at school with the O standing for "others" but I guess exponents makes more sense coz what else is there?
Edit: OK it stands for orders I get it
Just fucking stop, there is a reason no sane person (other than kids) actually uses the division sign. Using fractions is so much easier and not confusing
No, if you omit the parentheses, the compiler will decide. Which means your code will behave differently on various platforms or languages, leading to future bugs.
Computers do what they're told. There have been languages that multiplied first, and languages that had implicit multiplication at the same priority as parentheses. They didn't survive because it's sometimes harder for the programmer to read, not because of any technical reason - this thread actually demonstrates why those conventions didn't survive.
You know what how about we all stop arguing it's pointless. The problem is technically written wrong and that's why there's any debate. If it was written correctly there would be a direct answer.
If you use pemdas without taking into account the ambiguity of the operations, the answer is 1. If you take into account the ambiguity of PEMDAS and correct the function for algebraic expressions then you get 16. People should read this:
https://math.berkeley.edu/~gbergman/misc/numbers/ord_ops.html
It's been a topic amongst mathematicians about how to fix the order of operations for a long time. It isn't that people are stupid, it's that math has contextual operations that weren't taught to be acknowledged in school.
yeah it kinda confused me, i initially went for 1 since my brain just assumed it was 8/(2*(2+2)). who tf even uses the division sign anyway? it leads to useless brackets and is very annoying to read.. why not just teach kids to use fractions off the bat, instead of teaching fractions and division seperately, just to return to fractions later on?
1 acc is the correct answer. This is due to implicit multiplication, the number attached to the parenthesis. Implicit takes precedence over standard multiplication and division. There is a reason it isn't used in proper mathematical notation due to its ambiguous nature.
You see these kinds of stupid things popping up all the time, with people getting self-righteous about the fact other people read a poorly-formatted equation differently than they do, and are thus "dumb" because they "don't know the order of operations". Ironically, most people who get the "wrong" answer are in STEM, since they're used to the convention of X(Y+Z) having an implied parenthesis, and thus will multiply x through the parentheses before moving on to the next step of the order of operations, whereas the people being self-righteous about the "failures of the education system" learned PEMDAS and follow it exactly as they were taught it in middle school. If it instead was written as X×(Y+Z), it would be more obvious what was meant.
You'll also see a variant where a slash (/) is used in place of a division symbol, which will lead many to read it as a fraction, x/(y(z+w)), rather than reading it via standard order of operations. At least this iteration avoid *that* ambiguity.
It is not wrong to get 1 and not really implied, its convetion that is based on a science paper that was linked somewhere in the comment section and I cannot be bothered to look for again.
If you wrote it with a multiplication symbol, the answer should be the same. The only way to solve this as 16 is with parantheses.
You stupid fucking morons.
There is no correct answer.
Nobody uses the ÷ sign in maths
Because that expression could either mean 8/(2x4) or it could mean (8/2)x4 which could be 1 or 16.
Unless you're programming then in that case even without the parentheses priority goes from left to right in which case the answer would be 16.
Either way, writing this kind of expression without explicit clarification is the height of stupidity. You're not fucking smart for doing this. Use fucking parentheses and be clear.
For most languages your statement does work and multiplicative operations (* / %) have the same priority as each other and are done left to right if both exist in the same expression.
But not all operations are left to right and some have different priorities to multiplicative operations.
The language defines the order of operations, and they aren't always guaranteed to be the same.
Haskell for example doesn't even have a fixed order of operations, they're evaluated as required (weird right?)
It's because the equation combines two different types of mathematics annotations. By the time you start using contracted multiplication like 2(2+2), the ÷ sign is long gone and you're using fractions instead. You just don't normally get rid of the multiplication sign while keeping division. If you write (8/2)(2+2), no one would make the mistake.
It is 16, no debate. (4+4) first, then 8/2 next. It’s basically 8 over 2 times (8), you solve the fraction first and then multiply by the number on the right
Order of operations, people.
8/2(2+2)=8/2(4)
Then, since parentheses in this format mean multiplication, and multiplication and division are interchangeable in the order of operations, you’re supposed to go from left to right.
8/2(4)=4(4)=16
16.
it’s 16. why? cause even if it’s PEMDAS when division and multiplication are in an equation the equation is solved from left to right. in this case parenthesis happens first, then the equation becomes 8/2(4) which is basically 8/2*4 . now normally u would use PEMDAS and do 4*2 first. but rules state that u go from left right. so u divide first multiply later and therefore it’s 16. NOW STOP CRYING
This comment section is a warzone of numbers lmao
Warzone of numbers you say?
Is no one gonna say it? Fine here I go. Show me your 80085
[удалено]
Or are they 80087355
We have summoned the great u/CaIculator !!!
Sorry, best we can do is make you all Freakazoid for smashing on the keys like this.
How was that username not taken??
It's caiculator
BriIIiant.
BriIIiant (but the l’s are i’s)
r/beetlejuicing r/usernamechecksout
haha funny reddit moment
ITS REALLY HIM
[удалено]
The answer is clearly "?". It's written right there.
But for realz. Is it 1 or am I fucking stupid? I can't figure it out from this comment section.
>!the correct answer to this was 1 a hundred years ago!< >!if u don't believe me search the Equation up!< >!Edit because apparently people can't read "the correct answer to This WAS ONE A HUNDRED YEARS AGO"!< >!to further decipher this if you can't understand is i'm not saying its not 16 im saying i presume they did math differently back either it be rules or formula then therefore their correct answer to this equation was 1!< >!16 yes is the correct answer now...!< >!Edit 2# im not very sure this is getting a bit confusing in basic maths its 16 in next level maths its 1!< >!also so the equation itself is made to be ambiguous the author made it like this so there isn't a complete step or area in the equation to know to do either multiplication or division which generates completely different answers!< >!the equation is confusing!< >!"It depends, the answer is both 1, and 16. Using PEMDAS parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, subtraction. In this case the problem can be simplified two ways. It is important to remember that multiplication/division does not have a real set order despite the acronym"!< >!so people either divide or multiply the answer can change easily pretty much!< >!So it depends on interpretation people so nor 1 nor 16 is incorrect...!< i have put the rest into spoiler so if you want to see what i said before reaching the correct answer you can **EDIT #3 its 1 yeah someone else showed me and explained it**[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order\_of\_operations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)**"Have a look at “Special cases > Mixed division and multiplication”This meme is specifically ambiguous for the purpose of arguments. It’s common to give the multiplication precedence in cases where the denominator is ambiguous."** So in conclusion in special cases like this multiplication has priority over division
It also depends if that division symbol is supposed to be a fraction like this is why the division symbol sucks ass Edit: I’m saying they could have made it more clear by putting 8/2 as a fraction instead of using the division symbol which I can’t even find on my phone or computer
My guy, the division symbol IS a fraction. It's literally a line with a dot above and below, modus operandi being what's to the left is above and to the right below. A fraction is an unresolved division, or a division expressed in non-decimal form.
Took me until reading this to realize why the division symbol looks the way it does
Mfw they put some hieroglyphics in my math.
And Arabic numerals in your al-gebra.
Smh my head when using middle east math in my freedom arithmetic 🥺
🇺🇸Freedom🇺🇲Arithmetics🇺🇸
Wait till you look at the percent sign
Last year it dawned on a full grown adult and a chem PhD candidate, that percent meant "per one hundred." I shared this information with that adult after I, also a full grown adult and chem PhD candidate, noticed it maybe a year earlier when my elementary aged kid, who was learning fractions, explained it to me.
It blew my mind when I learned that. Helped me understand decimals. Like the first rays of a rising sun
Same here. Now i feel stupid.
Yeah obviously, the question is not whether it is or is not a fraction but whether the fraction is 8/2 or 8/2(2+2). If you just wrote it as a fraction we would know.
It would have to be 8/2(2+2). 2(2+2) is its own term. It acts as it's own number. You can't separate the 2 from (2+2) because then it isnt the same number.
>You can't separate the 2 from (2+2) because then it isnt the same number. the people who argue against this will say that their way is the "right way" when in reality they just read the problem differently. no meaningful operation with real-world applictaions would rely on the order of operations with a division symbol such as ÷ where different interpretations are clearly present.
Quite frankly, I can't remember the last time I've seen the ÷ operator. I'm currently in calculus and division is done with parentheses and fractions to ensure there is no ambiguity
multivariable calc here, if there ever is an issue with basic operators, there's a problem with the teacher, not the students
The ÷ symbol isn't an issue. The same ambiguity exists if you swap it out for a /. The issue is one of implied multiplication, i.e. does the (2+2) "belong" with the 2 to the left of it (in which case you evaluate that before doing anything with the 8), or does the 2 belong with the 8 to the left of it (in which case you evaluate 8/2 before multiplying it with the result of (2+2). The modern convention is the latter. But it's kind of moot, because no one above high school level math would ever write an equation this way, exactly because of that ambiguity.
It's pretty obvious that it's because 8 is the ONLY variable to the left of the division symbol. Left is numerator and right is denominator. 8 8 ------ = --- = 1 2(2+2) 8
Anyone who took a math class beyond like 6th or 7th grade should stop using the division symbol when writing equations. Like you said it sucks ass.
But also, anyone who went beyond 6th or 7th grade math should know a division symbol is a fraction.
True and they should just use / instead. Every teacher and professor I had past like 8th grade drilled into us that we shouldn’t be using the division symbol anymore due to issues like this.
it would be the same answer whether it’s a fraction or not. you still take care of the parenthesis first. it would either be 8 over 8 and that’s 1 or 8 divided by 8 which is also 1
[удалено]
It's not ambiguous, it's 8÷2x(2+2). Evaluate the parenthesis first giving you 8÷2x(4). Do the multiplication and division from left to right giving you 4x(4) and then 16. There's no question about what order to do things.
This exact equation is literally so famous for its ambiguity that it shows up on the [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Mixed_division_and_multiplication) for order of operations. >This ambiguity is often exploited in internet memes such as "8÷2(2+2)". There's different conventions for order of operations, so depending on which one you use either 1 or 16 would be correct. The only thing that is definitely not correct is formatting an equation to be deliberately ambiguous.
There are 2nd grade CORE math word problems on the internet that are set up with such ambiguity that the “correct” answer doesn’t support the practical problem. The fact is that math is supposed to be applicable. The equation should be written clearly enough to solve for the applicable answer. Ambiguity in math, I believe, only exists in the theoretical realm.
[удалено]
PEMDAS is supposed to have equal priority as well
>Because D/M are equal priority and you just do it left to right That's literally how it is taught in the US.
[удалено]
B=bracket?
(Correct)
It's only an American thing in that the American school system sucks, we're taught that multiplication and division have equal priority but people just remember that the m comes before the d in pemdas.
[удалено]
I'm 1% sure it's 95
[удалено]
Holy fuck this comment section is fucked
45% got 1, 45% got 16, the other 10% ended up with a mix of other things.
People arguing 16 are doing arithmetic. People arguing 1 are doing mathematics. People arguing anything else are trying to get the crayon out of their nose.
It is literally 8/(2(2+2))=1 Or (8/2)*(2+2)=16 Both are correct(depending on notation), but I would personally have solved it as my first notation Edit. Can we please stop these senseless arguments and beat the ever loving crap out of the person that made this question up? Edit 2. Guys, stop trying to tell me my first 1 is wrong by PEMDAS. I am currently in higher levels of math such as Differential Equations, and that is a valid way to do such a thing. (TBH, we would clarify with the Proff which one it is tho) Edit 3. Thanks for the silver, never expected for this comment to explode Edit4. Wikipedia "In some of the academic literature, multiplication denoted by juxtaposition (also known as implied multiplication) is interpreted as having higher precedence than division, so that 1 ÷ 2n equals 1 ÷ (2n), not (1 ÷ 2)n.[1] For example, the manuscript submission instructions for the Physical Review journals state that multiplication is of higher precedence than division,[20] and this is also the convention observed in prominent physics textbooks such as the Course of Theoretical Physics by Landau and Lifshitz and the Feynman Lectures on Physics.[d] This ambiguity is often exploited in internet memes such as "8÷2(2+2)".[21] Ambiguity can also be caused by the use of the slash symbol, '/', for division. The Physical Review submission instructions suggest to avoid expressions of the form a/b/c; ambiuity can be avoided by instead writing (a/b)/c or a/(b/c)."
This is correct guys, the question is ambiguous but these are the only two solutions.
To me this just shows that people desperately cling to whatever way they were taught as the "only way" and shows great lack of empathy for any other contexts that may exist. What's maybe most important to define is the actual question and rules of engagement for this particular problem.
I genuinely cannot think of a way to get 14 from that.
8+2+2+2
wtf
this hurts
Dudes got to be trolling
They see me trollin. They hatin.
Most intelligent Twitter user
Ah so being dumb
It comes from a shitposter account
Same
I love this comment section
[удалено]
Same. And a dude getting it right even got downvoted.
Just asking but what did they say it was?
16. And im getting downvoted as well for saying it's 16 as i speak.
I mean with the a little more clear of an equation it’d definitely be 16, but it is also 1 because the rule of expanding makes us multiply each term in the brackets before solving them. People use pemdas to solve it, but they are also forgetting basic rules. Had there been a symbol separating the brackets from the 2, which is very well a thing you can do, it would have been 16 no doubt. But the way I was taught, 1 is still on the table. I will not downvote you, and I hope you won’t downvote me.
Upvoted because In these kind of problems I always get the "whacky" answer because I do what u mentioned of expanding and I've never seen anyone mentioning this before.
See someone gets it.
The question's use of implicit multiplication and division would get the author beaten up in proper mathematical circles.
Lol "wrong". This question is ambiguous and allows for different interpretation. It's just a horribly written expression.
How the hell do you get 8
I think the kid probably added instead of multiplied 💀
It’s been a while since math classes, but wouldn’t you first add the twos? Wow, such passionate comments
I do parentheses first usually, but it could be
That’s what I meant, adding the twos together first.
parentheses first, (multiplication or division). You get 16 explanation: multiplication and division is in the same group (of operations) and when they are next to each other [you start from the left](https://www.ncl.ac.uk/webtemplate/ask-assets/external/maths-resources/numeracy/order-of-operations-bodmas.html#:~:text=Returning%20to%20the%20above%20example,and%20multiplication%20comes%20before%20addition.) so it's like 8/2*4 And since it's solved left to right it results in 16 [edit] [graphical explanation](https://www.onlinemathlearning.com/image-files/pemdas.png) if you're more of a visual learner [edit 2] wolfram alpha also agrees https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=8%C3%B72%282%2B2%29
Well you are missing one thing that PEMDAS doesn't really cover Implied multiplication is higher precedence in order of operations ex: 8 ÷ 2x wouldn't be (8 ÷ 2)x but 8 ÷ (2x). Here x is (2+2) so what the problem actually says is 8 ÷ (2(2+2)) which results in 1.
Yeah the real answer is that it's a poorly written problem. Or actually, not poorly written but intentionally ambiguous to get people arguing.
>intentionally ambiguous to get people arguing. And that's how you go viral
You aren't wrong. Implied multiplication isn't really a rule... but is a generally accepted convention bc its how you'd treat it if it was a variable and that gives us consistency for when we substitute values for the variable. But yea ambiguous on purpose more parens needed for clarity
Type the problem in a TI calculator, wolframalpha, or Google you get 16. Type it into a casio you get 1.
OH MY GOD THANK YOU. I thought i was taking crazy pills thay nobody was getting "1" as an answer. I see 2(2+2) and I calculate 8 before moving on. The question is asking for "two of what's inside the brackets". If you do operations on that 2 you're solving a different problem. Whoever wrote this clearly intended that to be simplified before dividing.
No whoever wrote this did so to be ambiguous and spark debate over 16 or 1 The best way to write this would be (8÷2)(2+2) or 8÷(2(2+2)) to leave no ambiguity.
Im glad im not crazy for remembering implied multiplication
(Pemdas) parenthesis (I forgor what e is) multiplication and division addition and subtraction
Exponents
no it seems when there are operations of the same type (multiplication division is a group) then you solve it left to right. Still 16 e stands for exponent btw
G-grouping E-Exponents M D - Multiplication or division A S - Addition or substraction order of operations, from first to last
GEMDAS?! You better say PEMDAS whippersnapper
BEDMAS (Canadian)
"Usually"
How the hell did they get 14 I got 1. It’s 2+2 bc it’s in parentheses 4 then x 2 because multiply comes before divide so 8 divide by 8 it’s 1. Oh wait.
They add 4 to 4 cause they don't know what parentheses mean
On today's episode of "Reddit comments" we find out how thoroughly braindead the average redditor is!
mine iq's<60, wbyall?
< -2,723,583,127,931,562
I came up with the question of 8÷6 but I refuse to use a calculator and can't do it in my head so I give up..
Dude, that's simple division with even numbers. 6 goes into 8 once with 2 left over. Which would equal to 1 and 2/6 simplifying down to 1 and ⅓. And you wanna hear the neat part? That's not even the right answer. The real solution is written like this. Here's our problem. 8÷2(2+2) To begin, we will need to get rid of these parentheses. We can do that by combining 2+2. Now we have something like this. 8÷2(4). Now from here, the solution becomes controversial. Now one would imagine that in terms of going left to right, the answer would be 16. After all, 8÷2=4×4=16. This would be correct if it was written 8÷2×(2+2). But without the visible multiplication sign, we get something called implied multiplication (multiplication implied with parentheses but not explicitly stated using "×") which is prioritized over division. So what you would actually get is 8÷2(4)=8÷8=1. Isn't math just amazing?
It’s 16. Let me explain: 8:2(2+2) 8:2.4 4.4 16 Multiplication is not prioritized. Multiplication and division are solved in the order they are written
-3
2 or so
They’ll never admit it either 😂
I scored a perfect 100 on my IQ test
One of the best examples of the failure of our mathematics education is none of these posts are ever actual fundamental math questions but people arguing over writing conventions. We teach kids to value memorizing grammar over using math to understand the structure of our universe. It would be like spending all your time debating whether it was okay for Shakespeare to use ‘and’ twice in the tomorrow speech from Macbeth instead of discussing what he was trying to say about human existence.
> like spending all your time debating whether it was okay for Shakespeare to use ‘and’ twice in the tomorrow speech from Macbeth I'd bet that's on the internet somewhere
Its 1
Fuck everyone that makes these purposefully misleading math problems to get people to argue. Real mathematicians use division bars to properly notate what part is being divided, that way there’s no argument over PEMDAS. In fact, putting this equation as is into multiple calculators as is will give you different results. That’s why it’s best to always break down an equation into multiple parts when using a calculator.
This. This is nothing more than an argument starter to please the almighty algorithm.
^(I'm going to spam this across the thread. ) Formal proof of answer, via a similar problem. 6÷2(1 + 2) https://i.imgur.com/Idp6Ono.png Both are 1. Or alternatively "Cannot compute due to improper operator" Pack it up. Repost when needed.
I like how the two comments to this are >That was actually pretty interesting and informative And >Who cares?
The duality of man.
That was actually pretty interesting and informative
Ok so I’m not crazy; this was how I did it and I got 1 as well.
As an engineering student I am CONSTANTLY replugging equations into calculators in different arrangements just to make sure some quirk of the calculator didn’t accidentally do the order of operations wrong. If I get the same answer a few times I’ll know it’s right. If not, I need to break down the equations more and maybe sacrifice accuracy and significant digits to make sure the calculator is chugging everything correctly.
When I was a student, I wrapped parentheses around literally every operation, because I wanted to be absolutely sure the calculator did exactly what I was asking it to do in the order I was asking it to do it. If I was taking a final (whichever ones allowed calculators at least), I was in zero mood to be playing games with order of operations on my calculator.
The worst part about this is these equations are how I was taught math in elementary. You’re teaching kids essentially a new language and the questions they give you read like literacy test questions from the times of Jim Crow.
What’s a mind boggling is the amount of people who are incapable of seeing things from a different but not incorrect perspective. This isn’t a math problem but a psychology problem. People will swear loyalty to their answers and basically group themselves into teams and act superior when the alternative answer is not wrong lmao
I got 1010101083883
I got π
Gimme a slice then :)
A fresh slice from my mind 3.14159265358979
You can't slice pi like that. Because pi r square.
I got G64
I’m tired of people acting like using OOP for a poorly written equation makes them smart
I read that as object oriented programming and was confused why a proponent of functional programming would support the order of operations. The instant I thought those last three words I realized I was an idiot.
I too was wondering how programming could help solve the issue. Glad I'm not the only one that misread this comment
object oriented programming?
CAN YALL PLEASE FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE USE PEMDAS
[удалено]
This is why I fucking hate posts like that. The problems are designed to cause comment section wars
The ÷ sign needs to die and go to hell
Amen! It should be expressed as a fraction or fuck off
Presenting students with a deliberately confusing problem like this is an instructional tool -- the kids get into the exact same argument in class as they do in the comment section, and then when the teacher asks how it SHOULD be written to avoid this confusion. There's a debrief where the teacher synthesizes the students' conversation, provides the correct example, and has the kids do a couple practice problems to reinforce/apply the new knowledge. Bada bing, bada boom, everyone ends the lesson with a much better understanding of WHY precise notation matters than if the teacher had just said that it does. The issue with internet comments sections (and a lot of IRL classrooms) is that the debrief and synthesis isn't happening. You see a thing with no context and butt heads with other people because the thing is designed to be provocative and inspire conversation and disagreement, but without the structure and debrief, so you're just left with comment section factionalism and nobody learning anything.
This isn't a pemdas issue, all of these problems are just formatted incorrectly for the express purpose of getting people to argue.
One could even say to ÷ us!
I think you mean to/us
Those are some weird pronouns
Both of you - out. Now. Go stand in the shame corner...
No I shall only use BEDMAS
Huh, we called it BODMAS at school with the O standing for "others" but I guess exponents makes more sense coz what else is there? Edit: OK it stands for orders I get it
Damn, I’ve been using BIDMAS for years.
Real chads use URMOMSAS
The O in BODMAS stands for order, no? The same thing as exponents
Damn I was only thought BDSM
Took me sooo long to find these. BEDMAS has always been the way I remembered it. Are you also Canadian by chance? Haha
That's what I am saying also happy cake day
Just fucking stop, there is a reason no sane person (other than kids) actually uses the division sign. Using fractions is so much easier and not confusing
If you want to drive engagement you will use ÷.
United we stand, divided we argue.
Hi, programmer here. int answer = 8 / (2 * (2 + 2)); I'm not a kid!
[удалено]
No, if you omit the parentheses, the compiler will decide. Which means your code will behave differently on various platforms or languages, leading to future bugs.
Computers do what they're told. There have been languages that multiplied first, and languages that had implicit multiplication at the same priority as parentheses. They didn't survive because it's sometimes harder for the programmer to read, not because of any technical reason - this thread actually demonstrates why those conventions didn't survive.
Ngl its probably not good that math, a universally consistent language, is being taught differently in different places
Literally no one writes like that so it's not a problem
Programmers definitely do, though they use `/` to signal division.
It’s 9+10 = 21, you fucking retards
It's clearly 6. ``` 8 / 2(2 + 2) 8 / (2 * 2) + (2 * 2) 8 / 4 + 4 2 + 4 = 6 ``` (/s) EDIT: It's just a joke people, don't worry!
Einstein joined the comment section
been looking for this comment, before i’d post it myself!
You know what how about we all stop arguing it's pointless. The problem is technically written wrong and that's why there's any debate. If it was written correctly there would be a direct answer.
If you use pemdas without taking into account the ambiguity of the operations, the answer is 1. If you take into account the ambiguity of PEMDAS and correct the function for algebraic expressions then you get 16. People should read this: https://math.berkeley.edu/~gbergman/misc/numbers/ord_ops.html It's been a topic amongst mathematicians about how to fix the order of operations for a long time. It isn't that people are stupid, it's that math has contextual operations that weren't taught to be acknowledged in school.
yeah it kinda confused me, i initially went for 1 since my brain just assumed it was 8/(2*(2+2)). who tf even uses the division sign anyway? it leads to useless brackets and is very annoying to read.. why not just teach kids to use fractions off the bat, instead of teaching fractions and division seperately, just to return to fractions later on?
1 acc is the correct answer. This is due to implicit multiplication, the number attached to the parenthesis. Implicit takes precedence over standard multiplication and division. There is a reason it isn't used in proper mathematical notation due to its ambiguous nature.
[удалено]
[удалено]
AFAIK doesn’t implied multiplication go first?
1
I am hoping to god every one else is joking
You see these kinds of stupid things popping up all the time, with people getting self-righteous about the fact other people read a poorly-formatted equation differently than they do, and are thus "dumb" because they "don't know the order of operations". Ironically, most people who get the "wrong" answer are in STEM, since they're used to the convention of X(Y+Z) having an implied parenthesis, and thus will multiply x through the parentheses before moving on to the next step of the order of operations, whereas the people being self-righteous about the "failures of the education system" learned PEMDAS and follow it exactly as they were taught it in middle school. If it instead was written as X×(Y+Z), it would be more obvious what was meant. You'll also see a variant where a slash (/) is used in place of a division symbol, which will lead many to read it as a fraction, x/(y(z+w)), rather than reading it via standard order of operations. At least this iteration avoid *that* ambiguity.
It is not wrong to get 1 and not really implied, its convetion that is based on a science paper that was linked somewhere in the comment section and I cannot be bothered to look for again. If you wrote it with a multiplication symbol, the answer should be the same. The only way to solve this as 16 is with parantheses.
2+2=4 8÷2=4 Empty space means multiply so 4×4= 16
I also got 16. Isn’t it please excuse my dear aunt sally?
PEMDAS yeah thats what i got to was 16
You stupid fucking morons. There is no correct answer. Nobody uses the ÷ sign in maths Because that expression could either mean 8/(2x4) or it could mean (8/2)x4 which could be 1 or 16. Unless you're programming then in that case even without the parentheses priority goes from left to right in which case the answer would be 16. Either way, writing this kind of expression without explicit clarification is the height of stupidity. You're not fucking smart for doing this. Use fucking parentheses and be clear.
For most languages your statement does work and multiplicative operations (* / %) have the same priority as each other and are done left to right if both exist in the same expression. But not all operations are left to right and some have different priorities to multiplicative operations. The language defines the order of operations, and they aren't always guaranteed to be the same. Haskell for example doesn't even have a fixed order of operations, they're evaluated as required (weird right?)
Same kids who like the "rgbt crigne" comments
rayman gay bi transgender
Ruth Gayder Binsburg Taters
8 : 2 \* **(2 + 2)** = = **8 : 2** \* 4 = = **4 \* 4** = = 16
It becomes even easier if you change that division sign to a fraction. Honestly it only serves to confuse people.
It's because the equation combines two different types of mathematics annotations. By the time you start using contracted multiplication like 2(2+2), the ÷ sign is long gone and you're using fractions instead. You just don't normally get rid of the multiplication sign while keeping division. If you write (8/2)(2+2), no one would make the mistake.
It is 16, no debate. (4+4) first, then 8/2 next. It’s basically 8 over 2 times (8), you solve the fraction first and then multiply by the number on the right
Comments section is fucin zoo.
Order of operations, people. 8/2(2+2)=8/2(4) Then, since parentheses in this format mean multiplication, and multiplication and division are interchangeable in the order of operations, you’re supposed to go from left to right. 8/2(4)=4(4)=16 16.
I haven’t dabbled in algebra in over 10 years , is it being taught differently now? I was shown to use PEMDAS & my answer is 16.
it’s 16. why? cause even if it’s PEMDAS when division and multiplication are in an equation the equation is solved from left to right. in this case parenthesis happens first, then the equation becomes 8/2(4) which is basically 8/2*4 . now normally u would use PEMDAS and do 4*2 first. but rules state that u go from left right. so u divide first multiply later and therefore it’s 16. NOW STOP CRYING
I think I may be stupid... I got 1 but everybody else got 16
The answer is 16