"Viral" maths problem
Moderator: Michael Wallace

 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 10398
 Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
"Viral" maths problem
I saw this come up on Facebook a day or so ago from The Mirror, so I thought I'd post it here. It's nothing original  I've seen similar before. It's also here.
What is 6 ÷ 2(1+2) ?
I'll be back to discuss.
What is 6 ÷ 2(1+2) ?
I'll be back to discuss.
 Johnny Canuck
 Kiloposter
 Posts: 1288
 Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
 Location: Atlantic Canada
 Contact:
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Nine. Simple BEDMAS: do the bracket to get 6/2*3, then multiplication and division left to right. This is objectively the only answer.
Funny message'); DROP TABLE signatures;
 Matt Morrison
 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 7685
 Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
 Location: London
 Contact:
Re: "Viral" maths problem
If a(b+c) == ab + ac isn't it 1?
Not done maths in many years so don't remember the rules as to when you would expand the brackets.
Not done maths in many years so don't remember the rules as to when you would expand the brackets.

 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 10398
 Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: "Viral" maths problem
If you read the explanation in the second link I gave or watch this video, they're quite clear that the answer is 9.
However, I think to talk about it simply in terms of BEDMAS/BODMAS/BIDMAS/TISWAS is to miss the point about where the confusion or potential ambiguity lies. And the website and video do not address this.
We have 6 ÷ 2(1+2). If it was written as 6 ÷ 2 x (1+2) then pretty much everyone would agree that it is 9 and there would be no problem. The confusion comes from not putting the multiplication sign in leaving just 2(1+2) all stuck together because it looks like it is a term in the equation itself. Another example in the video is 1 ÷ 2y (even though as mentioned the video doesn't address the underlying source of confusion). Should that be taken as 1 / 2 * y, or 1 / (2y)?
The "correct" answer I suppose would just be whatever some committee of mathematical notation decides. It's not really a mathematical problem and talking of BEDMAS/BODMAS/BIDMAS/TISWAS does not resolve the problem either. But it is a poorly worded question and you'd never get anything written like that in "real life" outside a problem designed to deliberately confuse.
But aside fron the "correct" answer, we can still discuss what we think the aforementioned committee should reasonably decide. And I think if a number is put adjcent to the brackets like that with no multiplication sign then it's more reasonable to conclude that it goes with what's in the brackets so that they're treated as a single term. And that would make the answer 1. But because it's debatable and not everyone would agree, noone should ever write a formula like that.
However, I think to talk about it simply in terms of BEDMAS/BODMAS/BIDMAS/TISWAS is to miss the point about where the confusion or potential ambiguity lies. And the website and video do not address this.
We have 6 ÷ 2(1+2). If it was written as 6 ÷ 2 x (1+2) then pretty much everyone would agree that it is 9 and there would be no problem. The confusion comes from not putting the multiplication sign in leaving just 2(1+2) all stuck together because it looks like it is a term in the equation itself. Another example in the video is 1 ÷ 2y (even though as mentioned the video doesn't address the underlying source of confusion). Should that be taken as 1 / 2 * y, or 1 / (2y)?
The "correct" answer I suppose would just be whatever some committee of mathematical notation decides. It's not really a mathematical problem and talking of BEDMAS/BODMAS/BIDMAS/TISWAS does not resolve the problem either. But it is a poorly worded question and you'd never get anything written like that in "real life" outside a problem designed to deliberately confuse.
But aside fron the "correct" answer, we can still discuss what we think the aforementioned committee should reasonably decide. And I think if a number is put adjcent to the brackets like that with no multiplication sign then it's more reasonable to conclude that it goes with what's in the brackets so that they're treated as a single term. And that would make the answer 1. But because it's debatable and not everyone would agree, noone should ever write a formula like that.

 Acolyte
 Posts: 137
 Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:30 pm
Re: "Viral" maths problem
This is the only correct answer.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:45 pmBut because it's debatable and not everyone would agree, noone should ever write a formula like that.
 Ian Fitzpatrick
 Devotee
 Posts: 507
 Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm
 Location: Wimborne, Dorset
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Totally agreeSam CapplemanLynes wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 2:50 pmThis is the only correct answer.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:45 pmBut because it's debatable and not everyone would agree, noone should ever write a formula like that.
I thought I was good at Countdown until I joined this forum
 Johnny Canuck
 Kiloposter
 Posts: 1288
 Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
 Location: Atlantic Canada
 Contact:
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Found a fellow programmer. Hello world.
Funny message'); DROP TABLE signatures;
 Matt Morrison
 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 7685
 Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
 Location: London
 Contact:
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Code: Select all
const printThisShitOut = `Gevin is in love with ${c4c.filter(c => !!c.cool).join(" and ")} and he is a prick.`;
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Gevin's in love with himselfMatt Morrison wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:45 pmCode: Select all
const printThisShitOut = `Gevin is in love with ${c4c.filter(c => !!c.cool).join(" and ")} and he is a prick.`;
<2m>

 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 10398
 Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Someone has to be.
 Matt Morrison
 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 7685
 Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
 Location: London
 Contact:
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Damn I must've been drunk. Saw you quoting that and I thought I must've made that post years ago, not last night.
Re: "Viral" maths problem
Ha, me too  didn't notice the double notMatt Morrison wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:24 pmDamn I must've been drunk. Saw you quoting that and I thought I must've made that post years ago, not last night.
<2m>
 Matt Morrison
 Postapocalypse
 Posts: 7685
 Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
 Location: London
 Contact:
Re: "Viral" maths problem
I do like to work with booleans.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests