Mathematics can be a fascinating and sometimes perplexing subject. While some people find joy in solving equations, others struggle to wrap their heads around the complexities. One particular equation has recently sparked a heated debate online, with people passionately arguing over the correct solution.
The equation in question is: 8÷2(2+2). At first glance, it may seem straightforward, but the real challenge lies in determining the appropriate order of operations to use. This has led to two popular formulas being discussed: BODMAS and PEDMAS.
BODMAS stands for brackets, order of exponents, division, multiplication, addition, and subtraction. Advocates for BODMAS argue that the answer is one. On the other hand, PEDMAS, which stands for parentheses, exponents, division, multiplication, addition, and subtraction, suggests that the answer is 16.
One Twitter user, @KnaughtMonk, confidently proclaimed that the solution is one. They demonstrated their calculation using BODMAS: 8÷2(2×2) = 8÷2(4) = 8÷8 = 1. However, @NomeDaBarbarian disagreed, stating that the answer could be either one or 16 depending on which mathematician one listens to. This user emphasized that math is a language and the order of operations should not be viewed as an inflexible rule.
The conflicting opinions and passionate arguments from users like @gcfssea and others only add to the mystique of this seemingly simple equation. It’s reminiscent of those times when we found ourselves daydreaming in math class, gazing out the window and escaping into our thoughts.
Jalapeño Popper Pigs in a Blanket
Insanely Delicious Tater Tot Pizza: A Slice of Heaven!
HOMEMADE SPAGHETTI
Recipe: Smothered Pork Chop Scalloped Potato Casserole
10 succulent plants that you can keep in water and won’t rot
Old Man Goes to Visit Daughter for His 80th Birthday, She Doesn’t Let Him Enter Her House – Story of the Day
Spicy Italian Crescent Ring
Just Stick a Bay Leaf in a Lemon! The Effect is Amazing!
Brittney Griner and Diana Taurasi Threaten to Quit Team USA After Harsh Fan Criticism: ‘Critics Risk Losing Two Great Talents’