Math Test (Page 4): Shouldn't be... Dik...

Dikdik Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

bobmcculloch wrote:

Seems that's the way I learned the rules.

Shouldn't be...

Dik

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

The final -3 +3 cancel one another. As the posed problem contains no ()s to direct the order of calculation every order is permissible of which the simplest takes priority. One could factor out 3 which would yield 3((1+3)-1+1) = 3(4) = 12

Dikdik Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

John_F wrote:

The final -3 +3 cancel one another. As the posed problem contains no ()s to direct the order of calculation every order is permissible of which the simplest takes priority. One could factor out 3 which would yield 3((1+3)-1+1) = 3(4) = 12

I'd have done 3 + (3*3) -3 +3

Dik

Jeffers

Plug the problem into separate Excel cells, once with parentheses, once without. In both cases you get 12. Plug it into a cell phone calculator without parentheses. Again 12. Apparently, machines know how to apply the rule in the absence of parentheses.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

jerryc41 wrote:

This type of computation drives a friend of mine crazy, and he refuses to accept the correct answer.

7th grade/8th grade/Alg1 concepts of order of operations are the key. It's really simple. Providing no parentheses, exponents first, multiplication and divisions - left to right 2nd - then last are additions and subtractions, left to right. So:
1. 3+3x3-3+3 = 3+9-3+3 = 12-3+3 = 9+3 = 12
Mark

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Add to exponents any other operators like square roots, trig functions, integrals, differentiations, etc.

markngolf wrote:

7th grade/8th grade/Alg1 concepts of order of operations are the key. It's really simple. Providing no parentheses, exponents first, multiplication and divisions - left to right 2nd - then last are additions and subtractions, left to right. So:
1. 3+3x3-3+3 = 3+9-3+3 = 12-3+3 = 9+3 = 12
Mark

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

John_F wrote:

Add to exponents any other operators like square roots, trig functions, integrals, differentiations, etc.

Yes, of course. However, those components are not needed to simplify the expression.
Mark

brent46 Loc: Grand Island, NY

b

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Jeffers wrote:

Plug the problem into separate Excel cells, once with parentheses, once without. In both cases you get 12. Plug it into a cell phone calculator without parentheses. Again 12. Apparently, machines know how to apply the rule in the absence of parentheses.

The devices don't know how to simplify the expression. The code written in the devices know how.

Mark

flyguy Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico

Shellback wrote:

PEMDAS or br Parentheses br Exponents br Multip... (show quote)

Amielee Loc: Eastern Washington State

The rule is Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally: Parenthesis, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction. The order in which operations are performed. The answer is 12 but my Office Depot calculator gives 18 as the answer. My Casio calculator give 12 as the answer. The Casio is correct.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

jerryc41 wrote:

This type of computation drives a friend of mine crazy, and he refuses to accept the correct answer.

B, 12.

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

18

Bykewrydr Loc: Alberta

b

nekon Loc: Carterton, New Zealand

The way this is written:

3+3*3=18, - 3+3=12