1. cunt

Attached: images (1).png (226x223, 6K)

based brazilians ITT

Attached: south brazilian.jpg (1536x997, 414K)

1
Fite me

Attached: 1546495831755.webm (1012x954, 130K)

Flag

1
Ez maths all other options are wrong and massively gay

which takes priority in order of operations, the division, or the jew thing?

2+2=4
8/2 =4
4x4=16

Jew thing. Always.
It’s maths, that’s what they excel at

it's intentionally left vague so that retards will argue about it on the internet

1. Flag
2. I'm not getting bogged down in an argument about order of operations when the question's clearly been designed to be deliberately ambiguous for the sole purpose of fostering disagreement.

1
looks fine to me

it's the fucking jews

how should you write it?

It's a question of if you multiply 2 x (2+2) or 8 / 2 first

That depends entirely on what situation it represents.

>16 order of operations

Attached: 1517940260715.jpg (300x168, 8K)

3.1416

you should never use that division symbol, for one thing

It's not vague.

1. what's inside parentheses
2. exponentiation/root extraction
3. multiplication/division
4. addition/subtraction
5. left to right

Simple. It's 16.

1

Indeed, and the ((())) come first
Then it’s divisions / multiplications from left to right

>(Parentheses), Exponents
>Multiple and Divide,
>Add Subtract, easy as that.
>Use Pemdas to get it right!

Attached: 148564836494529.png (1054x526, 69K)

Oy vey, oy gevalt, it's like another shoah

if it weren't vague, then people wouldn't be arguing about it in this very thread
x
_ is much clearer than x÷y
y

8/2*(2+2)
8/2*4
4*4
16
OR
8/2*4
8/8
1

IT SHOULD BE WRITTEN (8/2)*(2+2)

Attached: 1564241427598.jpg (850x976, 91K)

People are arguing because most are stupid and can't remember simple rules.

x
_ , x/y, x÷y is the same thing.
y

>x->infinite
Brainlet image for brainlet use.

1

Attached: download.png (477x574, 259K)

the fuck is a pemdas

you cant do that, Satan.
you'd have to replace all the twos for Xs

Solve it!

it's the same thing but the notation is confusing and open to misinterpretation, which is why iso recommends not to use ÷, and why you won't see it in higher level mathematics

In this case it's not because you can interpret it as
8 /(2(2+2)) or (8/2)(2 (2+2))
Fuck ÷

Can't be done. We have already established x=2
The equation you presented implies X is different from 2.

I said solve it.

0.5+x0.25

Attached: brainlet wojak ears2.png (645x729, 79K)

it is 16, all other answers are brainlet tier

1

Attached: tegaki.png (400x400, 6K)

thank you for your service

You can solve it, it has an infinite number of solution but you need to find the domain. It's not any infinite.

2

Attached: tegak§i.png (400x400, 6K)

No, there is only one interpretation, rules: >8/2(2+2)
You first solve what's inside parentheses
>8/2(4)
Remove & format the useless parentheses
>8/2*4
Left to right
>4*4
>16

There is NO other interpretation, you can't add parentheses in the right because you think "it's vague" and "open to interpretation"

Apparently it's 16, but if you ask me there should be a rule saying that 2(2+2)=(2*(2+2))

It's vague indeed because the 2 is attached to the parenthesis without a proper sign, implying multiplication, thus implying a superparenthesis

8/[2(2+2)]>8/(4+4)>1

Had it been written

8/2•(2+2) then 8/2 (4) + 2+2 (4) = 16

So it's actually 1. And all because monkeys cannot into • before parenthesis.

it isn't correct. The sentence is ambiguous, for we don't know if its (8/2)*(2+2) or 8/(2*[2+2])

this, french are math masters and he is right

Attached: IMG_20190801_180206.jpg (3264x2448, 1.63M)

Could be 1 or 16, but we'll never know because the equation is not fucking written right and it's on purpose.

16

It's an acronym!

aren't the parentheses bound to the two? meaning "2(2+2)" is a whole separate thing from "8".

>l'education americane

>this thread

Attached: five.jpg (565x330, 35K)

Attached: 1438435225588.png (1200x960, 710K)

>5
120 desu

This one isn't ambiguous, the answer can only be 120.

Thank you for your service, Hernandez

it's 6 u fucking retards

did i get it right?

No it's not. Multiplication has prevalence over addition, Alexandre.

Brainlet.

Big brain.

pemdas, simple as

Attached: sketch-1564694160493.jpg (1080x1920, 87K)

1 +1 isn't 4 retard xd

16

Nothing to argue about here, if you disagree with it you are disagreeing with order of operation of every calculator in the world.

Brainlet here.

Russia
16
It's not simple and I'm wrong, yes?

I think you goofed the first step.

Anyone who thinks this is not 16, please get the fuck out.

The answer is 5!
5! = 120

did i?

fat finger dont work on phone well

Americans write 1 like I

Should be
8 (2+x)
______
2

Big brain but shouldn't have told the answer.

1 and 16. It's not written properly.

Ahhhh, putain de francais de merde, he tricked me well.

Goodbye, I'm heading to the cuck room.

I told the answer to ruin your fun
take that pierre
thats for blowing up our ships

>1 and 16. It's not written properly.

Attached: 1506656526142.png (645x729, 82K)

*1 or 16

Dunno
Maths is for fucking nerds.

The correct answer is 17 (1+16)

Attached: ac1f2e0118921f11cc39d339e8b4144e.jpg (431x500, 46K)

Yeah I'm the fucking retard. I swear the Euros on here grew up eating fucking lead paint chips.

Rude, my kiwi bro.

Good night, future ex-brainlet.

It's only 16.

Alright, let's plug the numbers and see

8/2(2+2)=16
8/(2(2+2)) would be 1

Fine, yes, you're right.

you are if you think the answer could be 1 kek

Why do some people think you always do multiplication before division? Wtf is wrong with you?

Attached: shweet cat dum.jpg (358x330, 30K)

Honestly, you have to have some kind of brain damage if you think the answer is not clear. It is 16.

Simple as that.