Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A lot of people are having trouble with this math problem that requires some basic algebra [View all]SickOfTheOnePct
(8,710 posts)63. No, you don't do it in order when there are no parentheses
And the answer is not 19.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
185 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A lot of people are having trouble with this math problem that requires some basic algebra [View all]
sarisataka
Jun 2016
OP
Incorrect. The order of operations has been around since algebraic notation, and probably before
Android3.14
Jun 2016
#106
It's hard if you don't know that you are suppose to do the division first...
PoliticAverse
Jun 2016
#6
I used to code for actuaries - and made them give me everything with parenthesis
hollysmom
Jun 2016
#184
I have seen division by a fraction quite often in real life (and you don't always get parenthses)
1939
Jun 2016
#29
For Christ sakes. Division is the inverse of multiplication and 1 is the multiplicative identity!
longship
Jun 2016
#77
Could you give me an example of something like 9 – 3 ÷ 1/3 + 1 = ? that you would run into as a
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#152
exactly. it's pre-algebra, if you consider that as math that includes variables.
Gabi Hayes
Jun 2016
#159
I've seen enough of these to know this: IT DEPENDS UPON WHEN ONE WENT TO SCHOOL. I, for one,
WinkyDink
Jun 2016
#11
I was speaking in general terms of all these alleged "brain-teasers." Get a grip.
WinkyDink
Jun 2016
#170
Whippersnappers think the way they were taught is somehow superior to 1950's-1970's methods.
WinkyDink
Jun 2016
#15
I'm a professional mathematician, and this would give me pause as you presented it.
Donald Ian Rankin
Jun 2016
#16
I don't have my Physics textbook anymore, but do have my "Theory of Simple Structures" textbook
1939
Jun 2016
#89
Folks may disagree on the value of 3/1/3, but I hope that we can all agree that 3/1/3=27/9/3.
stone space
Jun 2016
#102
Some people probably forget that dividing by 1/3 is the same as multiplying by 3.
alarimer
Jun 2016
#19
Is dividing by 1/4 the same as multiplying by 4, also? Forgive me, I'm a fine arts major.
brush
Jun 2016
#40
dividing by the fraction a/b is always the same as multiplying by the fraction b/a
JustinL
Jun 2016
#74
You only need parentheses when the order of calculation is different from the usual rule.
athena
Jun 2016
#27
I've always thought that physicists omit c in multiplicative expressions because c=1.
stone space
Jun 2016
#94
I suspect that the fact that the problem uses two different symbols for notating division...
cemaphonic
Jun 2016
#172
You are obviously missing the point that several people in this thread are raising
Godhumor
Jun 2016
#57
Indeed, as far as I can tell "/" is considered an acceptable symbol to denote division
Chathamization
Jun 2016
#69
I agree with what you wrote except the outer parentheses are not needed.
Lucky Luciano
Jun 2016
#137
I got the right answer, but we learnt it as BOMDAS rather than BODMAS, and where he mentions it, he
OnDoutside
Jun 2016
#51
Software developers are the people I'd expect to get it "wrong" most often.
Donald Ian Rankin
Jun 2016
#91
Which parsing did you choose? I assume that you got either 9 or 1 as an answer.
stone space
Jun 2016
#97
If you claim that 3/1/3=3/(1/3)=9, you should also claim that 27/9/3=27/(9/3)=9.
stone space
Jun 2016
#101
equivalent operations (i.e. division) happen left to right without parentheses
Lucky Luciano
Jun 2016
#157
+1, "with improper punctuation" I had to use order of precedence all the time in writing psuedo code
uponit7771
Jun 2016
#168
That's because the Google algorithm failed to recognize that the obelus indicated that the fraction
LongtimeAZDem
Jun 2016
#181