Math poll.

[LWW]

Really not worth arguing about, but the way I drew it out, the answer is 4 because there is no sign between the 50+50 and the -25, so you would multiply.

(50 + 50) (-25 x 0) + (2 + 2) = 4

(100) * (0) = 0 + (2 + 2) = 4

The multiplication was already completed and it involved a negative number, in those problems the answer is eithier a negative or positive number, being it is 0, it is then written as + 0 ( you can’t do x 0 here).

[Karl_Hungus]

The more I read about it, the more it looks like a big mess. It's a wonder we haven't lost more space probes that way!

They have more effective ways of losing space probes....like failing to convert units to the metric system.

[LWW]

Really not worth arguing about, but the way I drew it out, the answer is 4 because there is no sign between the 50+50 and the -25, so you would multiply.

(50 + 50) (-25 x 0) + (2 + 2) = 4

(100) * (0) = 0 + (2 + 2) = 4

Multiplacation always comes before addition, having it the way you think it would (50*0) which would then be 50+0+2+2 which not even an option.

Change the 0 to a 1 in the original problem, I’m sure you then get 79!

[mtpockets]

I asked Alexa, she said 104

[supramax]

A hundred billion times one is a hundred billion. A hundred billion times zero is zero. End of story!

[ElrondHubbard]

They have more effective ways of losing space probes....like failing to convert units to the metric system.

To be fair, NASA hasn't made that particular mistake again since 1999.

To add insult to injury,

The discrepancy between calculated and measured position, resulting in the discrepancy between desired and actual orbit insertion altitude, had been noticed earlier by at least two navigators, whose concerns were dismissed because they "did not follow the rules about filling out [the] form to document their concerns". A meeting of trajectory software engineers, trajectory software operators (navigators), propulsion engineers, and managers was convened to consider the possibility of executing Trajectory Correction Maneuver-5, which was in the schedule. Attendees of the meeting recall an agreement to conduct TCM-5, but it was ultimately not done.

[sy2502]

I do it in the order that is there and the answer is 4, anything times 0 is 0. This other stuff like BIDMAS is the 1st I have ever heard of it.

oh boy....

50 + 50 - 25 * 0 = 50 + 50 - (25 * 0) = 100
(50 + 50 - 25) * 0 = 0

No parenthesis in the image above, hence only the 25 is multiplied by 0. I was taught the precedence of multiplication/division over addition/subtraction in first or second grade.

[Mark1T]

If the correct answer from the information given, without altering it with parentheses or brackets, which is not the intention, is not 4, ban me for a day.

If parentheses or brackets were to be used, they would have been provided and would create a different than intended formula. They were not.

[OldFartTom]

By the way, computer languages agree with BIDMAS - you can have any length expression so it becomes more important (whereas an older calculator shows one step at a time).

Paste the above into python for example and you get 104

Yes for this problem but you're naive if you think computer languages agree on this stuff , I've even had issues (pretty unusual) where the underlying CPU family could make a difference in very long floating point calcs.

But I give you a simple classic problem where python is "wrong" (depending on what your opinion of what wrong is

I am using ^ for power of, so 2^2 is two squared. Right. what is

-3^2

Do you interpret it as -1 * (3^2) or do you read it as (-3)^2 because programming languages differ. I think python gives -9 (but I'd need to double check)

[LWW]

oh boy....

50 + 50 - 25 * 0 = 50 + 50 - (25 * 0) = 100
(50 + 50 - 25) * 0 = 0

No parenthesis in the image above, hence only the 25 is multiplied by 0. I was taught the precedence of multiplication/division over addition/subtraction in first or second grade.

I think we agree, I mean I see the answer as 104.

You are correct about parenthesis and they were NOT in the problem so they should not be included unless you know where they go, imo they no parenthesis should not be added.

[LWW]

Yes for this problem but you're naive if you think computer languages agree on this stuff , I've even had issues (pretty unusual) where the underlying CPU family could make a difference in very long floating point calcs.

But I give you a simple classic problem where python is "wrong" (depending on what your opinion of what wrong is

I am using ^ for power of, so 2^2 is two squared. Right. what is

-3^2

Do you interpret it as -1 * (3^2) or do you read it as (-3)^2 because programming languages differ. I think python gives -9 (but I'd need to double check)

-9 using plain old math.

[ElrondHubbard]

If the correct answer from the information given, without altering it with parentheses or brackets, which is not the intention, is not 4, ban me for a day.

If parentheses or brackets were to be used, they would have been provided and would create a different than intended formula. They were not.

Last time wasn't good enough???

The rules of precedence are established so that parentheses and brackets don't have to be used. It's a default, and the parentheses are for when you are making an exception.

The fact that some software doesn't follow them is no reason for the rest of us not to.

[LWW]

El, anyone who answers 4 performed 50+50 before multiplying that sum x 0, which is incorrect order of operations.

[Mark1T]

Last time wasn't good enough???

The rules of precedence are established so that parentheses and brackets don't have to be used. It's a default, and the parentheses are for when you are making an exception.

The fact that some software doesn't follow them is no reason for the rest of us not to.

Lol. I am taking no risks of being banned. Some are way over-thinking such an obvious and simple equation. Doesn't take mental gymnastics to solve.

[LWW]

Lol. I am taking no risks of being banned. Some are way over-thinking such an obvious and simple equation. Doesn't take mental gymnastics to solve.

He’s using common core, there is no wrong answer, it’s interpertation, everyone gets a prize for trying!!!

The negative 25 is correct in the problem however bust performed the wrong order which gave him 4.

[ElrondHubbard]

Yes for this problem but you're naive if you think computer languages agree on this stuff , I've even had issues (pretty unusual) where the underlying CPU family could make a difference in very long floating point calcs.

But I give you a simple classic problem where python is "wrong" (depending on what your opinion of what wrong is

I am using ^ for power of, so 2^2 is two squared. Right. what is

-3^2

Do you interpret it as -1 * (3^2) or do you read it as (-3)^2 because programming languages differ. I think python gives -9 (but I'd need to double check)

Python doesn't use '^' as the exponent operator, it uses '**'. If you use Python in interactive mode and do -3**2, it gives you -9. If you set a variable such as x = -3, and then take x**2, THEN it gives you the correct answer, which is 9.

"Plain old math" would give a POSITIVE 9, because a negative times a negative is a positive.

Python uses the '^' operator for a bitwise XOR function. Putting that in your equation for an exponent is a sure path to fiery destruction.

[mtpockets]

Alexa hasn't let me down yet, too bad she doesn't get a vote

[ElrondHubbard]

Alexa hasn't let me down yet, too bad she doesn't get a vote

Alexa won't let you down, she'll just report you to Google, after which you'll be taken down.

[ElrondHubbard]

Lol. I am taking no risks of being banned. Some are way over-thinking such an obvious and simple equation. Doesn't take mental gymnastics to solve.

The best way to not overthink it is to use the standard order of precedence.

[Mark1T]

The best way to not overthink it is to use the standard order of precedence.

I accept that. IMO and out of respect for your opinion, the following is how I interpret the equation if I used order of precedence and order of operations.

Again, my opinion based upon the order that was given by OP:

(50 + 50) - 25 X 0 ***Notes 50 + 50 was placed in parentheses because they are both related as in addition. Minus 25 and the X 0, I did not place in parentheses because they are not related and should be separate. As a result, the answer to that part of the equation is 0.

The next part of the equation that is alike is 2 + 2, so written as + (2 + 2). The answer to that part of the equation is 4.

Finally, 0 + 4 = 4

If you place the 25 X 0 in parentheses, then that answer would be 104.

However, my interpretation is not using order of operations and reading it as given.

So, I can accept either way.

[mtpockets]

Alexa won't let you down, she'll just report you to Google, after which you'll be taken down.

Lmao, you could be right

[LWW]

"Plain old math" would give a POSITIVE 9, because a negative times a negative is a positive.

That is right, if the exponent is even the answer is positive, if the exponent is odd the answer is negative.

[IronCharles]

This is posted online and I cannot believe the answers people are posting. My old school math says 4 yet these people are coming up with 79 and 104.

Since there is no space between the minus sign and the number 25, the equation is 50 + fifty negative 25s (-1250) times 0, which equals zero. Zero + 2 + 2 = 4.

[OldFartTom]

Python doesn't use '^' as the exponent operator

understood. I wasn't following python syntax in my example and instead described my own syntax in an attempt to as clear and accessible to as many readers as possible

... in interactive mode and do -3**2, it gives you -9.
... ...
"Plain old math" would give a POSITIVE 9...

Exactly! This is the issue I was illustrating. Knowing BODMAS (BIDMAS?) is one thing, but it's unsafe to assume that's how it's done "in real life" - phrase chosen to trigger any pure mathematicians As a practical person I consider computational algebra and the method/effort of how to actually perform a calculation - and how long it takes. Sometimes including how much effort to just get pretty close to the answer if good enough is good enough, or if you made a large series of guesses how long until you stumble over the correct answer. Even on occasion not caring if it was the right solution as much as *a* solution .

It's not always going to be the same as how a pure mathematician looks at it.

[ElrondHubbard]

understood. I wasn't following python syntax in my example and instead described my own syntax in an attempt to as clear and accessible to as many readers as possible


Exactly! This is the issue I was illustrating. Knowing BODMAS (BIDMAS?) is one thing, but it's unsafe to assume that's how it's done "in real life" - phrase chosen to trigger any pure mathematicians As a practical person I consider computational algebra and the method/effort of how to actually perform a calculation - and how long it takes. Sometimes including how much effort to just get pretty close to the answer if good enough is good enough, or if you made a large series of guesses how long until you stumble over the correct answer. Even on occasion not caring if it was the right solution as much as *a* solution .

It's not always going to be the same as how a pure mathematician looks at it.

I don't trust a pure mathematician anyway. If I ever meet one, I need to find a way to corrupt them.

[LWW]

So much for those phucking math parties with the math professor.

Google even says 104, and I replaced the 0 with a 1 for giggles and still got 79.

Yet Google's answer to -3^2 was NEGATIVE 9 which is wrong compared to our math parties and mathisfun.com

[Mark1T]

So much for those phucking math parties with the math professor.

Google even says 104, and I replaced the 0 with a 1 for giggles and still got 79.

Yet Google's answer to -3^2 was NEGATIVE 9 which is wrong compared to our math parties and mathisfun.com

There are stories where a lady used Google Maps for directions to a party and she ended up in a lake. I blame Google 50% and the lady 50% for not thinking something's just not right with all this water.

[sy2502]

I think we agree, I mean I see the answer as 104.

You are correct about parenthesis and they were NOT in the problem so they should not be included unless you know where they go, imo they no parenthesis should not be added.

Parenthesis are added only when you want operations to happen in an order different from the universally agreed arithmetic operator precedence. No parenthesis up there so the usual precedence applies. The precedence is:

1) Parentheses
2) Exponents
3) Multiplication and Division (from left to right)
4) Addition and Subtraction (from left to right)

[mtpockets]