If you thought 8 ÷ 2(2+2) = ? was stupid and pointless, so did a lot of mathematicians.https://nyti.ms/2YKDk9f
-
It's not a question for mathematicians: there is no math in it, only elementary-school level arithmetics. The answer is 16. If it were 8÷(2(2+2)) then the answer would be 1. Yes, it's that simple.
If there were a rule that 2(4) had priority in the order of operations, would it make the calculation more interesting? No. No one writes the equation in this form, because it’s ambiguous. Write as a fraction, and there’s no ambiguity, and that’s a better option in every way.
-
-
There is no ambiguity about this. Just a lot of people who don’t know the rules.
-
Why should you have to remember stupid rules for a simple calculation like this? If you meant 8 — (2 + 2) 2 that’s what you should have written. The other form is just meant as a gotcha by being intentionally ambiguous.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's not an equation – it's just an expression.
-
Yes. Just put an x where the question mark is, and it’s an equation.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Actually, programmers write mathematical expressions and equations in linear format. Programmers know the rules of precedence by heart but it's always a good practice to use as many parentheses as necessary to remove all ambiguity.
-
Exactly! By the way, yet another – programmer's
– way to prove the answer it's 16 is to use •any• programming language and 'implement' that expression.
If, by chance, you find a language that gives 1, please let me know: I'd like to have a closer look at that language. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It could be written like this: (8÷2)(2+2).
-
Yep.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Well according to 2x and if x=2+2, then the answer is 1.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.