It's a deliberately ambiguous notation. The correct answer is telling the person who wrote it to fix their equation.
And it's not an operator precedence question. It's a question of if multiplication by juxtaposition also implies that the multiplicands are grouped. And that varies on what you're used to seeing in what context. The people who argue that it's pure "PEMDAS" will still read 1/2x as "1 over 2x" and not "one half x." I don't think anyone would read "ab/cd" as ((a*b)/c)*d... though I suppose a programmer with a very light math background might read it as only two variables.
Anyone who gets sucked into lengthy arguments on this is wasting their time.
It isn't ambiguous at all. Type it into the calculator on your phone exactly how it is written and you will get the same answer as everybody else's phone, which is 16. It doesn't matter if the multiplicands are grouped. Since they are the same priority as division, it goes left to right regardless. The only thing that would change the order is a higher priority operation, being parentheses or an exponent.
It doesn't matter if the multiplicands are grouped. Since they are the same priority as division
Reread what you just wrote and think about it because it contradicts the second half of what you said. If the multiplication by juxtaposition implied a group then 2(2+2) is shorthand for (2*(2+2)).
Type it into the calculator on your phone
"My phone says it so it's true." This generation, I swear.
it contradicts the second half of what you said. If the multiplication by juxtaposition implied a group then 2(2+2) is shorthand for (2*(2+2)).
That's my point. There is no shorthand with parentheses here. The only shorthands in math don't change precedence, i.e. 2(2+2) is shorthand for 2*(2+2) and nothing else.
"My phone says it so it's true." This generation, I swear.
My decades of working with math is why I know it is true. I only mentioned the phone to prove it to those of you who are so confident about being wrong. The developers of those calculator apps all have a better understanding of operator precedence than you do, hence why they all give the same (and correct) answer. And I would bet that I'm older than you.
I hate to be that guy, but:
8/ 2(4)
8/8
1
Consent=1
Multiplication and division have the same priority in the order of operations, so it goes left to right at that point. So
8/2(2+2)
8/2*4
4*4
Consent = 16
Only if you assume it's linear, and not the way to write it with 8 over 2 times (2 plus 2).
I'd need to see it written on paper.
There is no assumption. If it was supposed to be calculated the other way, the entire divisor would be in parentheses.
Did you fail 4th grade math?
Does PEMDAS elude you?
Okay pajeet streetshitter.
It's a deliberately ambiguous notation. The correct answer is telling the person who wrote it to fix their equation.
And it's not an operator precedence question. It's a question of if multiplication by juxtaposition also implies that the multiplicands are grouped. And that varies on what you're used to seeing in what context. The people who argue that it's pure "PEMDAS" will still read 1/2x as "1 over 2x" and not "one half x." I don't think anyone would read "ab/cd" as ((a*b)/c)*d... though I suppose a programmer with a very light math background might read it as only two variables.
Anyone who gets sucked into lengthy arguments on this is wasting their time.
It isn't ambiguous at all. Type it into the calculator on your phone exactly how it is written and you will get the same answer as everybody else's phone, which is 16. It doesn't matter if the multiplicands are grouped. Since they are the same priority as division, it goes left to right regardless. The only thing that would change the order is a higher priority operation, being parentheses or an exponent.
Reread what you just wrote and think about it because it contradicts the second half of what you said. If the multiplication by juxtaposition implied a group then 2(2+2) is shorthand for (2*(2+2)).
"My phone says it so it's true." This generation, I swear.
That's my point. There is no shorthand with parentheses here. The only shorthands in math don't change precedence, i.e. 2(2+2) is shorthand for 2*(2+2) and nothing else.
My decades of working with math is why I know it is true. I only mentioned the phone to prove it to those of you who are so confident about being wrong. The developers of those calculator apps all have a better understanding of operator precedence than you do, hence why they all give the same (and correct) answer. And I would bet that I'm older than you.
It's not ambiguous, it's confusing to people who don't understand operator precedence.