Math quiz

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

rklapp

NAR# 109557
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
1,272
Location
Oahu, Hawaii
If referring to the pixelated version of the shape, then 2. If the symbolic version, then none because it will never be a right angle at the infinitesimal scale.

Now...

1614324090681.png

PEMDAS vs BODMAS
 

Sooner Boomer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
3,447
Reaction score
1,034
My answer is 1.

Why? PEDMAS

Step 1: Parentheses

Step 2: Exponents

Step 3: Multiply

Step 4: Divide

Step 5: Add

Step 6: Subtract

So the order would be:
(1+2)=3
2x3=6
6 / 6 =1
 

dhbarr

Amateur Professional
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
7,249
Reaction score
1,675
THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER
 

Funkworks

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2018
Messages
1,426
Reaction score
1,018
I was taught not to use the ÷ sign because of that kind of confusion. When you write the following instead, there is no ambiguity:
\[ x=\frac{6}{2(1+2)} \]
or
\[ y=(\frac{6}{2})(1+2) \]
I've never seen the ÷ sign in a scientific or engineering textbook or professional paper.

As for the half circle question, I would agree, but I suspect a mathematician having gone through non-Euclidean geometry would also have interesting answer. There might be a way to express an answer using limits but I haven't quite nailed it.
 
Last edited:

wonderboy

Active Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
40
Reaction score
37
Location
S.E. Michigan
Step 1: Parentheses

Step 2: Exponents

Step 3: Multiply

Step 4: Divide

Step 5: Add

Step 6: Subtract
I was taught that multiplication and division (Step 3 & 4) were of equal "priority" so when faced with both, work left to right. Same with addition and subtraction (Step 5 & 6).

So given that, I break down first step as: 6 / 2 * 3, and then work left to right: 3 * 3 = 9 .

I also agree that I hate equations written in somewhat ambiguous form. When in doubt, I usually over constrain with parentheses.
 

jsdemar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
2,639
Reaction score
658
As for the half circle question, I would agree, but I suspect a mathematician having gone through non-Euclidean geometry would also have interesting answer. There might be a way to express an answer using limits but I haven't quite nailed it.
I would begin the proof with some definitions: a tangent line intersects a curve at a single point; a line must have at least two points; a right angle is the intersection of two lines with angle exactly 1/4 a revolution; the bisector of a circle intersects only two points on a circle. Working from there, the figure cannot have any right angles because the "corner" is a single point. The tangent line at the intersection will have a right angle, but it only shares a single point with the shape in the figure.
 

BABAR

Builds Rockets for NASA
TRF Lifetime Supporter
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
8,390
Reaction score
3,160
If referring to the pixelated version of the shape, then 2. If the symbolic version, then none because it will never be a right angle at the infinitesimal scale.

Now...

View attachment 452433
PEMDAS vs BODMAS
Poorly written equation for precisely the reason that causes the confusion.

To me, a good writer would “phrase” the equation in a manner that would not allow any doubt. Unfortunately, people are inherently lazy. Meconium happens, but it is particularly frustrating when easily AVOIDABLE meconium happens.

sort of like many Model Rocket instructions.

I remember my Japanese instructor in college, Fujita-Sensei, saying, “KISS, Cadet-san, KISS.”

translated, “Keep It Simple, Stupid.” Some things transcend language differences.
 

BABAR

Builds Rockets for NASA
TRF Lifetime Supporter
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
8,390
Reaction score
3,160
In sixth grade they bused some of us up to the high school to take a physics class.
Our teacher talked about how someone had estimated the cicumeference of the earth using rods and shadows and known distances and angles. I think it was Eratosthenes method,

we were given cheap plastic globes and sticks and protractors.

I didn’t have a clue how to do it, but the globe unscrewed, and I measured the diameter and multiplied by Pi. I didn’t show my work because I knew that wasn’t how it was supposed to be done.

Mr. Engel has long since passed to where he can likely see and measure the Earth and all the celestial bodies easily and directly at his leisure. But there are around 18 people around 6 years older than I am who still don’t know (nor I am sure who care or even remember) how the sixth grader was the only one who got the right answer.
 

SkyFire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
972
Reaction score
2,334
Location
Tucson, AZ
Simple equation? Let's see if you can get it right;
50 + 50 - 25 x 0 + 2 + 4 =
 

Funkworks

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2018
Messages
1,426
Reaction score
1,018
Simple equation? Let's see if you can get it right;
50 + 50 - 25 x 0 + 2 + 4 =
Don't mind me, practicing Latex:

x = 50 + 50 - 25 x 0 + 2 + 4
x = 50 + 50 - (25 x 0) + 2 + 4
x = 50 + 50 - 0 + 2 + 4
x = 50 + 50 + 2 + 4
x = 106

Um ... darn. Didn't get to use Latex.
 

PhlAsh

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 9, 2011
Messages
982
Reaction score
65
You say PEDMAS but you perform PEMDAS. Division takes priority over Multiplication because Division is Multiplication to the -1 Exponent.

Hmmm... My quote of SoonerBoomer got thrown out...
 

Funkworks

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2018
Messages
1,426
Reaction score
1,018
Not especially but your thread about Latex coincides with people at work talking about it and me realizing that learning it again could be useful (for work).
 
Last edited:

Funkworks

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2018
Messages
1,426
Reaction score
1,018
I learned Latex while using another forum long ago and forgot about it. I just found out how to use it here, so if I get quick enough, it might supercede my alternatives.
 

Thundercloud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2017
Messages
188
Reaction score
29
1614434062955.png
I typed it into Excel like it was typed in the question, and got 9.
 

Mike Haberer

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Messages
566
Reaction score
361
THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER
Agreed. By stating an answer of 2 the assumption is being made that the curved portion of the figure is intersecting the line at a right angle, but that could be a false assumption. The curved portion of the figure could be intersecting at an angle of 89.99 degrees with the line, which would look like but not be a right angle and the answer would be zero. Precision, in description and measurement, matters.
 

Latest posts

Top