Kenneth Chang

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.

Ok, I found 3 type of answers 8÷2(2+2) = 1/8/16 It's depend on our perspective of the rule, lol 1> 8÷(2(2+2))=1 8> 8 (2+2) = 8 _ 2 16> 8 x (2+2) = 16 _ 2

For your answer to be 1, you would need the outer pair of parentheses to be there. But they’re not there, are they?

Ok, let's try this. How would you calculate 8 ÷ 2a, where a=4? In algebra, 2a is a factor that sticks together, so you'd have 8 -- = 1 2a This is why you never see ÷ in algebra.

8/2a=16 8 -- = 1 2a In the second equation the 2a is understood to have parentheses around it by the notation it was written in. When writing on a single line, you need to be aware of the need for parentheses when you intend things to be done in a certain order.

Yeah, but now you're just making up stuff ("understood") as you go along. The point is that it's not unreasonable to interpret 8 ÷ 2a as 8 -- 2a which, again, is why you don't use ÷ when learning algebra.