Home  RSS Feeds 
Original Content  
Funny Pictures  Funny Videos 
Funny GIFs  YouTube Videos 
Text/Links  Channels 
User Rankings  
NSFW Content 
nostalgamos
Level 14 Content: Sort of disliked Offline Send mail to nostalgamos Block nostalgamos Invite nostalgamos to be your friend 

latest user's comments
#81  Repost [+] (2 new replies)  05/08/2012 on 1983  5 
 
#133  OCs were thumbed down and ******* reposts are on …  04/16/2012 on Taste the rainbow.  0 
#483  be proud of you. i finished my higher mathematics mod…  01/22/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#476  if you would write it on a paper  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#475  yeah cause i deleted it. Too many pinkie downs from some idi…  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#473  as I said [+] (4 new replies)  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#489 
abunnywithaboner (01/22/2012) [] technically there IS a wrong one, as one isnt useing the order of operations #504 
nickhols (01/22/2012) [] No, there isn't both use the order of operations people don't understand that the order of operations is semisubjective, primarily concerning implied multiplication (this problem) and also a little bit of the exponent part. Both follow the first operation, (1+2)=3,so now we have 6/2(3) We skip the exponent part, because obviously there are none. Now we get to the problem: the multiplication and division step. all multiplication and division steps with more then one function tend to pose a problem, since ideally they would be done at the same time. The whole "left to right" thing is just a rule of pinkie. This is why, as i stated, we no longer use division signs. SO, from here there are 2 ways to do it. The first would be using the left to right method. We do 6/2 first, and get 3. so then it is 3(3) which is obviously nine. However, an increasingly prevailing way of solving this is by implied multiplication, stating that 2(3) is a single term and should be solved solved accordingly. Then it is essentially 6/(2(3)) since it is a single term, and 6 has to be divided by it all together. So it's 6/6=1 Both started with parentheses and follow the order of operations through the multiplication/division step. They're both right, or wrong, depending on how you look at it. But the problem is written incorrectly, so it's kinda a moot point. #475 
nostalgamos (01/21/2012) [] yeah cause i deleted it. Too many pinkie downs from some idiots who could'nt understand what i said.78  
#472  Comment deleted  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#470  [url deleted] Wolfram FTW! ;D 6/2(1+3) … [+] (2 new replies)  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
 
#467  nope sry  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#461  haha so many math pros xD pinkie down and show eve… [+] (2 new replies)  01/21/2012 on Math ain't even mad.  0 
#480 
anonymous (01/21/2012) [] yes, i've been through 5 semesters worth of math classes, and i'm going to college to be a fucking engineer, yet i'm wrong. i would like you to tell me what exactly is wrong with what i said. #483 
nostalgamos (01/22/2012) [] be proud of you. i finished my higher mathematics modules on my university, too. If you write 6/2(1+2) its the same like (6/2)*(1+2) and not 6/(2*(1+2)) 
Show:
Sort by:
Order: