Often , social media has to be polarise to be profitable , with people clashing and increase involvement . Over the last few days , there has been a peculiar competitiveness online – and it all has to do with a math equation .
The equation posted by@pjmolIappears to be childlike and straightforward : 8 ÷ 2(2 + 2 ) = ? There are no unearthly surgical procedure or integer numbers , yet people are baffled when they solve the equality and get unlike answers from their peers , either 16 or 1 .
Even different calculators produce different results . Some people are claiming mathematics is broken or that nobody taught them mathematics properly . However , the confusion lies in the fact that the motion is set up in a shoddy way .
So what ’s the truth ? concord to the rules of algebra , the result should be 16 . permit ’s breach it down with the traditional approach shot . It does n’t weigh if you have been teach algebra with theBODMAS(brackets , order , division , propagation , addition , subtraction ) rule or thePEMDAS(parentheses , index , multiplication , division , increase , deduction ) .
To begin , you work the bracketed addition bite and end up with an equation that reads 8 ÷ 2 x 4 = ? According to both BODMAS and PEMDAS , division and multiplication have the same priority . So once you get there , how should you figure out it ? From left to right . You do 8 separate by 2 and then you multiply by 4 .
So why do people and calculators both get it wrong ? The equation is set up to be ambiguous , and mathematicians would certainly be annoyed if you write it like that . For humans and machines , it literally depend on which counselling you move after solving the brackets . People that calculated 1 should n’t feel like they have done an terrible error .
What ’s missing in the equation is a couple of brackets that would tolerate someone to arrive at the correct solvent without ambiguity . You could have ( 8 ÷2)x(2 + 2 ) , which would match 16 , or you could write it as 8÷[2x(2 + 2 ) ] , which be 1 . Both these option would certainly have been more aboveboard , but they probably would n’t have function viral .
