48÷2(9+3) 의 답은?
알림
|
페이지 정보
작성일
2024.10.04 13:59
본문
48÷2(9+3) = ?
1. 2
2. 288
전 2라고 생각합니다.
하지만 288이 맞는것 같기도 합니다(응?).
댓글 15
/ 1 페이지
Dimebag™님의 댓글
인생여러컷님의 댓글의 댓글
@Dimebag™님에게 답글
요즘 학교에서는 수학을 안가르치는 걸까요?
아무리 수포자라 해도 이 정도는 알 것 같은데 말이죠.
이게 논란'꺼리'가 되나..갸우뚱 하게 되네요.ㄷㄷㄷㄷ
아무리 수포자라 해도 이 정도는 알 것 같은데 말이죠.
이게 논란'꺼리'가 되나..갸우뚱 하게 되네요.ㄷㄷㄷㄷ
말없는님의 댓글의 댓글
@인생여러컷님에게 답글
동영상속의 강사도 말하듯이.. 어.. 그게 그러니까.. 인거죠 ㅎㅎ
Persona님의 댓글
괄호안 덧셈 계산하고 왼쪽에서 오른쪽으로 쭉 연산하면 288이 나오네요.
하지만 실제 계산에서 2앞에 괄호가 하나더 있다고 판단하는 거니까 2가 정답이네요 ㅋㅋㅋ
하지만 실제 계산에서 2앞에 괄호가 하나더 있다고 판단하는 거니까 2가 정답이네요 ㅋㅋㅋ
한돌님의 댓글
연산기호가 생략된 곱셈을 한 덩어리로 봐서 우선한다는 것이 있기는 한데, 혼동을 일으킬 수 있는 표현은 괄호를 쓰던가 해서 정확하게 표현하는 게 맞다고 생각합니다.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
Multiplication denoted by juxtaposition (also known as implied multiplication) creates a visual unit and has higher precedence than most other operations. In academic literature, when inline fractions are combined with implied multiplication without explicit parentheses, the multiplication is conventionally interpreted as having higher precedence than division, so that e.g. 1 / 2n is interpreted to mean 1 / (2 · n) rather than (1 / 2) · n.[2][10][14][15] For instance, the manuscript submission instructions for the Physical Review journals directly state that multiplication has precedence over division,[16] and this is also the convention observed in physics textbooks such as the Course of Theoretical Physics by Landau and Lifshitz[c] and mathematics textbooks such as Concrete Mathematics by Graham, Knuth, and Patashnik.[17] However, some authors recommend against expressions such as a / bc, preferring the explicit use of parenthesis a / (bc).[3]
More complicated cases are more ambiguous. For instance, the notation 1 / 2π(a + b) could plausibly mean either 1 / [2π · (a + b)] or [1 / (2π)] · (a + b).[18] Sometimes interpretation depends on context. The Physical Review submission instructions recommend against expressions of the form a / b / c; more explicit expressions (a / b) / c or a / (b / c) are unambiguous.[16]
This ambiguity has been the subject of Internet memes such as "8 ÷ 2(2 + 2)", for which there are two conflicting interpretations: 8 ÷ [2 · (2 + 2)] = 1 and (8 ÷ 2) · (2 + 2) = 16.[15][19] Mathematics education researcher Hung-Hsi Wu points out that "one never gets a computation of this type in real life", and calls such contrived examples "a kind of Gotcha! parlor game designed to trap an unsuspecting person by phrasing it in terms of a set of unreasonably convoluted rules."[12]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
Multiplication denoted by juxtaposition (also known as implied multiplication) creates a visual unit and has higher precedence than most other operations. In academic literature, when inline fractions are combined with implied multiplication without explicit parentheses, the multiplication is conventionally interpreted as having higher precedence than division, so that e.g. 1 / 2n is interpreted to mean 1 / (2 · n) rather than (1 / 2) · n.[2][10][14][15] For instance, the manuscript submission instructions for the Physical Review journals directly state that multiplication has precedence over division,[16] and this is also the convention observed in physics textbooks such as the Course of Theoretical Physics by Landau and Lifshitz[c] and mathematics textbooks such as Concrete Mathematics by Graham, Knuth, and Patashnik.[17] However, some authors recommend against expressions such as a / bc, preferring the explicit use of parenthesis a / (bc).[3]
More complicated cases are more ambiguous. For instance, the notation 1 / 2π(a + b) could plausibly mean either 1 / [2π · (a + b)] or [1 / (2π)] · (a + b).[18] Sometimes interpretation depends on context. The Physical Review submission instructions recommend against expressions of the form a / b / c; more explicit expressions (a / b) / c or a / (b / c) are unambiguous.[16]
This ambiguity has been the subject of Internet memes such as "8 ÷ 2(2 + 2)", for which there are two conflicting interpretations: 8 ÷ [2 · (2 + 2)] = 1 and (8 ÷ 2) · (2 + 2) = 16.[15][19] Mathematics education researcher Hung-Hsi Wu points out that "one never gets a computation of this type in real life", and calls such contrived examples "a kind of Gotcha! parlor game designed to trap an unsuspecting person by phrasing it in terms of a set of unreasonably convoluted rules."[12]
widendeep79님의 댓글
2가 맞긴한데 오해없도록 기호를 쓰는게 우선이죠. 싸움붙이는 식이네요
울아이아빠님의 댓글
자꾸 도는 떡밥인데요, 문제가 잘못되었다가 맞는 것 같습니다.
숫자 사이에 있는 연산부호는 생략하지 않는 것이 일반적입니다.
생략할 경우 연산 부호의 계산 원칙대로 진행해야 하는데, 숫자로 표현할 경우엔 문제가 됩니다.
숫자 사이에 있는 연산부호는 생략하지 않는 것이 일반적입니다.
생략할 경우 연산 부호의 계산 원칙대로 진행해야 하는데, 숫자로 표현할 경우엔 문제가 됩니다.
그녀는애교쟁이님의 댓글