The answer is 11. This is all very very strange. If you know the rules of math, without parenthesis, etc., you will know it is 11. You should have learned that pretty early in grade school. But...I had 5 semesters of calculus when an engineering major, a long time ago. I don't remember ever seeing a problem in college without parenthesis, brackets etc. With those you can make this into a bunch of different problems, but hey, if you don't have them, then the answer is 11. There are rules for not having parentheses, and they make the answer 11. Eleven. I can't believe I am taking the time to write this.
Fake math-puzzle event becomes one of Facebook's most-viewed posts
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
BogdanR
Posts: 434 +725
No, there are no parentheses on that initial expression, they are not needed. If you add parentheses like you do, the result of the expression changes completely.
(3x3-3)/(3+3) is completely different from 3x3-3/3+3. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain this...
((3x3)-(3/3))+3 is the only way to add parentheses if you wish but in this case they are not needed. The multiplication and division have precedence already in the 3x3-3/3+3 expression. And then the left-to-right order applies.
Last edited:
captaincranky
Posts: 20,155 +9,152
Nor can I believe it was so simple to provoke you into doing so.
If we do the equation your way, I accept the answer is 11. However, I view it as a simple linear word problem. "If johnny has 3 pennies, he farts and now there's magically 3 times as many pennies, he has 9. Then, his sister steals 3 pennies, and now he has only 6. At the other end of the table there are two rows of 3 pennies, which makes 6. So, how many times does 6 go into six, once-ish...
Unfortunately, I forget algebra a few seconds after I walk out of the classroom. However, I can do, "practical math for the common man", stuff like area, volume, the value of Pi, and square root. I even understand the inverse square law, and how often it crops up in the oddest places. For example, in the F stop numbers on a camera lens. I can read a tape measure and a rafter square. I know it's humdrum stuff, and nobody will ever hire me to calculate the trajectory of a rocket to mars. Id likely guesstimate and hit Saturn.
Anyway, I did provide you with the opportunity to rub my nose the fact you've had five (5) semesters of calculus. That should be worth something. No?
Quixotic
Posts: 13 +7
Use of 'z' (zed and not zee - more dig) is still made where it better conveys, as in your example 'zzzzzzz'. This further illustrates that proper English is nuanced, an attribute to be cherished.
It's because in French the it's spelled with an S (as it was in Latin), but (in this case) pronounced like a Z. So the solution was obviously to keep using French, but for some weird reason they really didn't like to be our effective colony in the late middle ages
Arthurik_jan
Posts: 67 +40
Captaincranky, dude, you're solving a completely different equation:
3x3 - 3/3 + 3 is not the same as (3x3-3) / (3+3). Unless it is actually written that way. Here is what you are solving - [image link](https://imgur.com/a/o4FTivs), I apologize for repeating, but for emphasis, **it's not the same equation.** Ask someone who teaches maths if you have any doubts.
I guess this is why this became such an interacted-with post, a lot of people are out to prove others wrong, instead of truly making sure if they've understood the problem and are actually solving it correctly. Zero introspection. Or it isn't a problem and we're just humans being humans, doing human things.
You have to realize he's just trolling you... Just block him - I did it years ago and I'm much happier
captaincranky
Posts: 20,155 +9,152
Which sort of mirrors the feeling we "Yanks", had about King George, and England's peculiar choice of the flamboyant bright red coats for their storm troops. I believe that was circa 1776 CE.It's because in French the it's spelled with an S (as it was in Latin), but (in this case) pronounced like a Z. So the solution was obviously to keep using French, but for some weird reason they really didn't like to be our effective colony in the late middle ages
OTOH, I believe we would legitimately have been categorized as "terrorists", in the current colloquial application of the term. You know, with the whole throwing the tea overboard misbehaviour < Check that out.
Funny story: Later, we apparently chose a more low profile, less "Pride Day-ish", green, for our standing army's uniforms.
Anytime "fashion" becomes the topic, spirited, if not outright contentious debates, are likely to ensue.
And so it was with Mexico. The Mexicans took exception to the whole solid green get ups. (I mean get real, have you ever seen a solid green or camo serape?)The Mexicans found the color green particularly offensive, especially when it was on the opposite side of a battlefield in their territories.
Well as it happens, "ustedes culos quien vestirse en todo verde, vayanse", doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. Nor would we entenderlo. The Mexicans embraced our language just enough to share their feelings about us being there thus, "green go".
I"m so far off topic now, I'm hesitant to explain how that phrase morphed into "Gringo"
Last edited:
captaincranky
Posts: 20,155 +9,152
I'm not really pursuing "proving you wrong", since I conceded that if you used algebraic convention your answer is 11. But from a practical <(Insert "pedestrian" there if you must), standpoint, "1" works.
I'm 76, and have no need whatsoever of trying to relearn algebra, (Not that I fully grasped it the first and second times around). Truth to tell, I've never needed it.
The first thing that came to my mind, was the behavioral modification potential. If you came up with the "correct" answer, you simply knew you were a "genius". Now if, and only if, there was an additional proffer, such as, "would you like to take the whole test", when combined with you** already convincing yourself of intellectual superiority, the authors pretty much had you where they wanted you. They could, sell you something, install malware, or just milk the encounter for as many clicks as possible, to enhance their potential advertising fees.
Speaking of clicks, TechSpot really got their money's worth out of this thread. As for Facebook, I'm not now, and never will be, a member.
But, if I did, and put up my true profile, (76, (ostensibly "lonely"), a bachelor, only child, with no friends or family), but embellished it with say 50 million dollars in assets, think how many Russian "brides' I could potentially snag. Along with their pimps in the background instructing them to get as much of my personal information as possible.
So, despite certain individuals insisting that, I'm "trolling", and should be "blocked". I'm just coming at the issue from an entirely different perspective.
** Royal you.
gamerk2
Posts: 1,324 +1,536
1/3 of TS fails 2nd grade math.
Multiplication & Division first guys:
3*3-3/3+3
(3*3)-(3/3)+3
(9)-(1)+3
8+3
11
Done.
Multiplication & Division first guys:
3*3-3/3+3
(3*3)-(3/3)+3
(9)-(1)+3
8+3
11
Done.
gamerk2
Posts: 1,324 +1,536
Its more dumbfounding that people are actually making an argument of this. It's not even hard; this is basically second grade math.
AnilD
Posts: 339 +488
It says a lot about the state of Facebook when over 100 million people interact with a fake math competition while actual creators struggle for reach. The algorithm doesn’t reward value — it rewards friction and ego. This really shows how social media isn’t just about content quality, but emotional triggers.
captaincranky
Posts: 20,155 +9,152
What I still want to know is, "what did you win for getting it right"?
Well, other than a good ego self massage, and the opportunity to talk down to everybody that got it wrong.
And FWIW, you might want to investigate exactly what is "2nd grade math" with Google's AI:
[HR][/HR]
AI Overview
In second grade math, students build upon their understanding of numbers and operations, focusing on place value, addition and subtraction within 1,000, measurement, and basic geometry concepts. They also begin to explore fractions and basic multiplication.
gamerk2
Posts: 1,324 +1,536
Proving my point on both counts.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Java turns 30 and shows no signs of slowing down- VitalyT replied
-
Gaming makes a comeback in Nvidia's AI-dominated empire- 3ogdy replied
