Can Jow Forums solve this ?

16

>8 / 4 + 4

Attached: 1553062732979.png (564x488, 210K)

kek

16

1488

1 cause pemdas

are murican really THIS dumb?

obelus is not a valid operator

Technically as it's written right now:

8 / 2 * (2+2)

8 / 2 * 4

4 * 4 => 16

but the problem is stupid

It's lacking parenthesis, so you have to assume it's either 8 dividing 2*(2+2) or 8/2 multiplied by (2+2). Now fuck off and go back.

Anyone who answers "PEMDAS" is a retard, you can ask 10 Math PHD's and they will all tell you it's impossible to tell which one of these (pic related) it means because it is written ambiguously, and if asked to guess, they wouldn't guess in a consensus.

Also, the "left to right" meme isn't mathematics, your professor was a dumbass.

I'll thread myself, fuck it

/thread

Attached: file.png (335x131, 2K)

I want to nakadashi Chinatsu

Isn't that exactly what these people said

Attached: 1548264698739.jpg (716x1116, 82K)

bread should've ended here

Actually the correct answer is to tell whoever wrote this to fuck off. if you can put 2 parantheses around 2+2 then you would also put 2 more to avoid ambiguity

anybody answering with a number is a moron

>le ambiguous broblem

No you fucking retards, if it's not written then it's NOT IMPLIED. If it's missing parenthesis, then you can SAFELY assume the parenthesis aren't needed and you can apply basic order of operation

The answer is 16, punch it into a calculator if you need more proof. Stop trying to sound smart by parroting nonsense.

this

pretty sad that /g can't do basic operations

No, because it's a bad expression. It should be either 8/(2(2+2)) or (8/2)*(2+2). That's probably one of these baits being posted on social media to trigger highschool dropouts/americans, right?

it is a shittily-written problem. No real human would write it this way for this exact reason

it is wrong. order of operation is not even defined in the question itself

using only 2 parantheses is actually a sign that its a trick question

not that "anything" is implied you fucking moron

It is ambiguous because it's not the proper way to write it, simple.

(You)
also, this ( ) should be enough for an answer
(I quoted the wrong post on the other one)

I didn't read the whole thread after I read the shit that always pops up, just wrote, illustrated and posted

once you get in 8/2*4 there is no exact order, "left to right" doesn't exist

8÷2(2+2)
8÷2(4)
8÷8
1

no its simply a wrong way of notation

try it on a calculator using polish notation then you fucking mongoloid

>trusting your compilers implementation for order of operations
you bring shame to the house of C.

16

16 = 4(2+2) = (8:2)(2+2) != 8:2(2+2)
1 = 8:8 = 2(4) = 8:(2(2+2)) != 8:2(2+2)

The correct answer

wrong

It's 1 you retards

Nonsense, obelus and parenthesis? lmao, who falls for this.

Pretty sure it's 16.

programmers can’t into math
colour me surprised

This is the correct answer, the mathematics rules say so.

who gives a fuck about polish notation

>once you get in 8/2*4 there is no exact order, "left to right" doesn't exist
lol, yes they do. You end up with 4 * 4, just read left to right

64

16

parantheses are literally a symbolic representation of the exact order

missing 2 means whoever made this is a fucking moron and people who "solve" it are wrong

3.141592

> Precedence and the associativity of operators.
No place for wimps (or Jow Forums).

I've got a fun one for you, Jow Forums!!

let x = 3
what is 1/2x?

Attached: Untitled.jpg (383x627, 25K)

33

kek
Is wolfram the arbitrator of math now?

Fish

That is the whole point of confusion about this problem

No, "reading left to right" isn't mathematics and it isn't even a consensus, your high school teacher told you this to make it simple for you and the other kids, or he actually believes this and is a moron. You should be able to make an equivalence of operations in the problem, because * and / are THE SAME THING in mathematics (Just like 2 - 2 = 2 + (-2), and 4/0.5 = 4*2, simply put), in a way, you "solve" them at the same time, it can't be shown to be ambiguous

Example:
2*2*2*2*2 = 4*2*4 = 2*4*2*2 = 2*2*4*2 etc...
There is no right order

When you see 8/2*(2+2) you should be able to solve them at the same time, but you can't make an equivalence like this:
2*(2+2) = (2+2) + (2+2)
because the problem isn't defined, you can't tell where that 2 is, like you can in here There is no order to factors in a product, maybe in C (because it needs one to be a programmable languange), but not in Math

Attached: plantguide.jpg (1571x3000, 934K)

16, D and M have same precedence so you apply them left to right.

read this

am I genius compared to Jow Forums tards?

Attached: Untitled.png (229x41, 1K)

This is why we should use RPN. There is no ambiguity when it comes to order of operations with that. You either have
8
2
2
2
+
*
/
or
8
2
/
2
2
+
*

8/2(2+2)
8(1+1)
16

Yes, use brackets or fractions to make it unambiguous.

1
Anyone else saying anything else is retarded

Ctards are fucking dumb

Attached: PEDMAS.png (568x592, 16K)

16

Im with this guy

>ambiguous
Nope

8%2(2+2)
8%2(4)
8%2*4
4*4
16

16

Yeah. You do not read left to right, you follow the order of operations. The 2 is next to the parenthesis, is multiplies the result, and that is then used in the division.

>He thinks PEMDAS means multiplication takes priority over division
Brainlets

Can Jow Forums pass this interview?

Attached: INTERVIEW.png (572x646, 49K)

It's fucking 1 you absolutely fucking degenerative imbeciles
Jesus fucking Christ

>your compiler's implementation
The order of operations is well defined in C standards. The order should not differ between different (standards-conforming) compilers.

RPN avoids this issue
2 2 + 8 2 / *

So youre saying that
8/2/(1/0.25) should equal 8*0.5(4) or should it be 8*0.5(0.25)?

8/2(2+2)
8/(4+4)
8/8
1

If it's so fucking ambiguous than use your fucking brain to remove the ambiguity. Instead of dividing by 2, just multiply by the reciprocal of 2, which is 1/2. So that means..

8 / 2 ( 2 + 2 ) =
8 * ( 1 / 2 ) * ( 2 + 2 ) =
8 * .5 * 4

Either way you fucking multiply, it comes out to 16.

8 * .5 * 4 =
4 * 4 = 16

or

8 * .5 * 4 =
8 * 2 = 16

Summerfags need to die

I didn't even realize that there could be some other result than 1, but so many people in this thread answered 16.

>placing parentheses where there are none
16 is the only right answer

Attached: 279.jpg (375x375, 34K)

only the original author's brain can stop being stupid and go on to produce a new written representation of the underlying expression that does not have any ambiguity in it
(You) on the other hand have nothing which you can use to disambiguate

but of course highschool/freshman autists are unable to deal with notation being separate from the underlying maths and will go into endless hissyfits about their idea about how all STEM-concepts are perfect and never ambiguous

Attached: 1564112572428.jpg (776x651, 95K)

>8 / 2(2+2)
>8 / 4 + 4
Correct

>(8/2)(4+4)
or
8/(2(2+2))
Anyone who got their education before common core era will will first expand brackets and then divide 8 by what they got.

>having brain damage

It depends whether or not you let multiplication take precedence over division.

This.

first post has correct answer, all subsequent posts are unnecessary

it doesn't depend on that because you DON'T let multiplication take precedence over division
these niggas know

they have the same precedence you shitlord

that's a bingo

Stupid people have always existed, it just before internet and social media they werent visible. If in early 2000 you asked this question you probably would have gotten similar amount of people who think its 16. Its just at that time anyone who could do basic math didnt care and stupid had other things to do other that solving internet memes and then posting about it on twitter. It was segregated in a way and it was a good thing. Nowadays they are trying to dumb down anyone they can get their hands on hence common core

lisp doesn't have this problem

1

8/2(2+2)=8*1/8
Therefore answer is 1

yes

What's it like being stupid?
Basic order of operations says you evaluate what's in the parentheses first:
8%2(4)
and then solve left to right because multiplication and division have the same precedence:
4*4
16

It's not ambiguous. The solution is clearly 16.

This is wrong. 8 * (1/2) * (2+2) = 16

You're retarded.

So it depends on you being illiterate? * and / have the same priority. Division is just multiplication with the reciprocal value.

Attached: 1553961868018.jpg (125x102, 2K)

Rewrite your problem into using only multiplication or division and see how well your theory holds.