Originally posted by joecct
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
6÷2(2+1) = 9
This would also be read as 6÷2*3. Because the multiplication and division hold the same importance in an equation, you then move from left to right in your order of operations.
Thus... 6÷2=3, and 3*3=9."The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984
"One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir
"Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Originally posted by St. Clown View Post6÷2(2+1) = 9
This would also be read as 6÷2*3. Because the multiplication and division hold the same importance in an equation, you then move from left to right in your order of operations.
Thus... 6÷2=3, and 3*3=9.**NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.
Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Originally posted by joecct View Post6÷2(2+1)
Is the answer 9 or 1?
One calculator gave the answer as 9, the other 1.
Using ()MDAS, the answer is 1.
If you treat ÷ & * equally, and solve it as 6÷2*3 the answer is 9.
Opinions??
Edit: oh sh-t. That's wrong. How on earth can I have been wrong about this for 55 years and never actually gotten a wrong result? I guess parens have become ubiquitous.Last edited by Kepler; 04-04-2019, 10:26 AM.Cornell University
National Champion 1967, 1970
ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
I was going to say you should re-read your link, but looks like you got there. Clown is correct, M = D, so proceed from left to right.
Comment
-
Originally posted by St. Clown View Post6÷2(2+1) = 9
This would also be read as 6÷2*3. Because the multiplication and division hold the same importance in an equation, you then move from left to right in your order of operations.
Thus... 6÷2=3, and 3*3=9.
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Originally posted by jerphisch View PostI was going to say you should re-read your link, but looks like you got there. Clown is correct, M = D, so proceed from left to right.Cornell University
National Champion 1967, 1970
ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kepler View PostIt amazes me that I have been wrong about this. It's like finding out you have the alphabet wrong. I just assume at some point in my life I'd have hit something which conclusively corrected me. It's not as if I don't use algebra ALL THE TIME EVERY F-CKING DAY. I've got a quantitative methods degree for god's sake.PSNetwork / XBOX GamerTag: xJeris
Steam Profile
Sports Allegiance
NFL: CHI; MLB: MN, NYM; NHL: MN, MTL; NCAAB: MN, UNLV; NCAAF: MN, MIA; NCAAH: MN; Soccer: USA, Blackburn
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Originally posted by JF_Gophers View Posttime to up the requirements on those degrees!Cornell University
National Champion 1967, 1970
ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020
Comment
-
Originally posted by joecct View Post6÷2(2+1)
Is the answer 9 or 1?
One calculator gave the answer as 9, the other 1.
Using ()MDAS, the answer is 1.
If you treat ÷ & * equally, and solve it as 6÷2*3 the answer is 9.
Opinions??
It’s either 6÷2x(2+1) or 6/2(2+1). Using the implied and the intentional at the same time is wrong syntax.
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Originally posted by alfablue View PostIMHO, none of the above, since the usage of symbols is not correct. It’s wrong to mix the symbols like that.
It’s either 6÷2x(2+1) or 6/2(2+1). Using the implied and the intentional at the same time is wrong syntax.**NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.
Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.
Comment
-
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2
Originally posted by alfablue View PostIMHO, none of the above, since the usage of symbols is not correct. It’s wrong to mix the symbols like that.Cornell University
National Champion 1967, 1970
ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kepler View PostIt's confusing but it's not "wrong." That is a well-formed expression. It's not undefined.
You can’t mix styles like that and pretend the implied operations still work. That’s the entire reason there are rules to the operations.
Comment
-
Originally posted by alfablue View PostIt’s a syntax error.
You can’t mix styles like that and pretend the implied operations still work. That’s the entire reason there are rules to the operations.
Comment
Comment