You are all retarded and cannot do math

You are all retarded and cannot do math.
Prove me wrong

Other urls found in this thread:

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-3^2 + ((9 + 2)/(2 - 1))
wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(-3)^2 + ((9 + 2)/(2 - 1))
purplemath.com/modules/negative4.htm
wolframalpha.com
youtube.com/watch?v=Y3CZ_JBQ0do
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Hint: The answer is 2

1

why the fuck should i give a shit

/thread

Its enough.
Also, -2, not 2.

20

Retard alert, you're not solving for X you're just doing the maths. Answer is 20.

Wrong. It's 2.

the expression is poorly formed. you should specify either (-3)^2 or -(3^2).

however, following standard order of operations, the correct result is 2.

Lololol -9+11... 911

18
is this some weird new meme?

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-3^2 + ((9 + 2)/(2 - 1))

/thread

(-3 to the power of 2 equals -9)(2+9=11) (2-1= work it out Sup Forumstards) 11 over 1 = 11 so now we do -9 + 11 = reply to this post or your mother will die tonight.

-3^2=9

This guy paid attention in class.

Would -3^2=9? A negative number squared should be a positive number.

-3^2 or -3x-3 = 9
>your mother raised an idiot and deserves to die

20

so what is your problem?

That was a reply to the guy saying -3^2=-9.

20 you stupid losers

See:

and realize you are a pleb who can't math

(-3)²=9
- 3² =2

in this case it is 2

Fucking newfags

(-3)²=9
- 3² =-9

thats what i meant, here it is -9 and the final answer is 2

if it were (-3)^2 then yes. But the negative symbol exists prior to the value. As it's not stated that the negative is squared its taken as -(3^2)

Is that an entrance test to an online college?

wrong

this

except, it's not

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(-3)^2 + ((9 + 2)/(2 - 1))
fuck tard

purplemath.com/modules/negative4.htm

Here's a nice 5th grade level link to explain it to you :)

but it totally is. if a negative is not followed by a parenthesis it can be assumed that the negative applies only to the number immediately following it. which is 3.and -3 squared is 9. if you want to distribute a negative you have to have the parenthesis after it.

the -3 is not in parenthesis you fuck

>inserting parenthesis where they did not previously exist

that's not how it works friend, nice try tho ;^)

Order of operations, as well as understanding the difference parenthesis can have on a math problem is key to solving this.

This answer would be very different if it were (-3)^2

nice bait.

>it can be assumed

there ain't no assumptions in math friend

its -3 not - (3) but nice try.

20

its strictly stated not assume.

then please put this on wolframalpha.com and show me

2

are you fucking retarded?

see:

So is it 2 or 20? Seems pretty split among the posts.

That's a common misconception, and I already started working on a response knowing someone like you would say that:

Much like how certain words and rules are used in the English language, there are also certain rules with math.

For example:

If you see -3^2, we must follow order of operations. This means treating the 3^2 as its own separate entity. Furthermore, the - in the front is implied to be outside, treating it as if you're taking the 3^2 and multiplying it by -1.

So it looks like this:

-1(3^2)

The ONLY time you assume it's (-3)^2 is unless it's specifically written like that on paper.

Also think about it: Order of operations states that you take exponents first, THEN multiply. So why would you multiply 3 by -1 first, THEN take the exponent of ^2?

The answer is you don't. You just have to become better acquainted with these little rules of math.

My final point? I got the correct answer.

seems like
>inserting parenthesis where they did not previously exist

-3 is -3 not (-)3
-3+7 is not -10 its 4

please, do explain

purplemath.com/modules/negative4.htm

written so a 6th grader can understand

9+2 is not in parenthesis
2-1 is not in parenthesis
and the whole fraction is also not in parenthesis in the original problem.

That's true when there's no exponents. However since there is an exponent involved order of operations changes how things are written out/implied.

-3+7
implied to be
-1(3)+7
So order of operations states that you multiply first, then add.
-1(3) is -3
Then you add 7
-3+7 = 4

This whole thing changes when you involve exponents:

-3^2 +7
Implied to be:
-1(3^2)+7
Order of operations:
-1(9)+7
-9+7
-2

See how that changes things. Don't worry you'll get use to all of these bs implied rules.

Here's food for thought:
Solve this:

-(2+2)^2+9

Negative three squared, increased by the sum of the number two and nine divided by the number two decreased by one?

(-3 • -3) + (2 + 9 / 2 - 1)
(9) + [(2 + 9) ÷ (2 - 1)]
9 + (11 ÷ 1)
9 + 11
20

-27?

lmao, there was never andy ambiguity in that expression. those parenthesis are so that WA understands what the fuck is going on.

please, go plug "9 + 2 / 2 - 1" into WA and see what comes out.

jesus christ you're stupid

you are a strangely patient person to be on Sup Forums

911...

Iseehwatyoudidthar

does an exponent or multiplication come first in order of operations?

Nah, dude, changing -3^2 into -1(3^2) is like multiplying a number by its negative. -3^2 = -3 • -3, so what you'd really need to do to make it accurate would be to separate the negative from EVERY 3 involved. So -3^2 can actually be rewritten as (-1)(-1)(3)(3), or (-1)(-1)3^2, but not just (-1)3^2.

He's also wrong, so...par for course.

I'm glad I'm not going insane over here. I haven't need math for a while but I know -3^2 is 9.

-3^2 = -9 (no parenthesis)
2+9 = 11
2-1 = 1

-9 + (11/1) = -9 + 11 = 2. Bush the 2nd did -9+11 confirmed.

>taking a photo of your screen instead of using screenshot
>windows 10
>edge
>chrome
>cortana
>windows store
>taskbar along the bottom

underage kill yourself

It's clear you havn't used math in a while

2+9/2-1

thats 5.5

I dont know why you guys are adding parentheses there. Just because it looks to be in fraction form doesn't change the order of operations. Its bad form, but a fraction is just "divide buy".

The answer is -3.5

Sorry when is the last time in your daily life you had to ^2 numbers?

You're not insane, you're just being trolled. That's what these, "Are you smart enough to answer this simple equation," threads are about. Dudes who haven't taken math in a while are repeatedly told that there's some obscure rule they've forgotten until they start to believe it or get frustrated by the apparent retardation of the posters trolling them.

And if someone screenshots an explanation of the concepts involved in the problem, the trolls call them gay for correcting them. Pretty simple shit.

Good question I haven't solved it myself. Here let's try:

-(2+2)^2+9
Implied to be
-1(2+2)^2 +9
Order of operations. Solve what's inside the parenthesis first:
2+2 is 4
-1(4)^2 +9
Next, solve the exponent:
4^2 is 16
-1(16) +9
Multiply is next:
-1(16) is -16
-16 + 9
Finally, add or subtract:
-16+9 = -7
The answer is -7

You must have messed up somewhere. Maybe you thought the ^2+9 was all in the exponent, which would give you:
-(2+2)^11
This was not my intentions, and I apologize. What would I get anyway?
-(4)^11
4^11 is 4194304
-(4194304)
Answer would be -4194304

Sorry bro I'm not sure what you did.

I tutor kids around the age which do this kind of stuff. I wish I knew what part of math this is specifically referring to, then I'd just link you guys directly to the rule involving exponents and stuff and save everyone a lot of time.

-3^2 == -1 (3^2)

The full order of operations is such:

PEMDAS
- Inside the parenthesis
ex: (4+2+3(3+3))
- Exponents
ex: 4^2
- Multiply OR Divide, whichever comes first left to right
ex: 4/2x3/8
- Add OR Subtract, whichever comes first left to right
ex 4-3-5+3+3-2

-3 X -3 + (2 + 9 / 2-1) = 20
No further discussion is required

/thread

Also nypa, do your own high school algebra homework, underaged b&.

-3^2 == -1*-1 (3^2)

Except that you can't cancel shit out in fractions when they're being added or subtracted to anything else in the fraction. Just when they're being multiplied or divided.

In 14/2, it's 2•7/2. Since 14 is divisible by 2, you cancel the two. Likewise, 27/9 is 3•3•3/3•3. So you can cancel out everything but the last 3 in the numerator.

If you try to cancel out the 2s in 2+9/2-1, you're not dividing (which is the purpose of fractions), you're subtracting part of the numerator from the denominator. If 28+4/4+4 got simplified to 28/4, the real answer (32/8=4) would get fucked into 7.

Last week, during my multi variable calculus exam

Jesus Christ, I hope you're doing this on purpose.
-(2+2)^2+9
(-2+-2)^2+9
(-4)^2+9
(-4•-4)+9
16+9
25

That math is incorrect.

-3^2 is like saying -1(3^2) which is like saying -1(3x3).
It's not saying:
(-3 x -3)

The ONLY time we can definitively say that it is like (-3 x -3) is if it's specifically written on the paper as (-3^2).

From what I recall about these types of threads, these questions are often intentionally written like this to cause a stir. It no longer becomes a problem involving math so much as it becomes a problem involving our individual interpretations of the poorly-written problem.

However, I've gotten the correct answer, which is achieved when you do it my way, and don't do it the way you're proposing.

There are a bunch of bullshit little implied rules with math when it's written out this way. One of them is:
"When you're given -3^2 as shown on paper/computer screen, you need to assume it's -1(3)^2
Then you use Order of Operations to solve it so you'll get -9.

I'll tell you guys what: Go ask your teacher. She'll verify it, and you'll learn something important about math like this that'll apply even when you get to Differential Equations and Linear Systems Theory.

you guise are all retarded the answer is 20
-3 squared is 9
2+9= 11
2-1=1
11/1=11
9+11=20
NewFags

aww your still in math thats cute.

That's wrong. You're distributing the negative in to the parenthesis first. PEMDAS very clearly states you must solve what's inside the parenthesis first, then continue on from there.

So it's not (-2 + -2) it is -(4)^2 +9

*you're

At least he's still attending higher education and benefiting from it...just saying.

-3^2 is "negative three squared," not "three squared, then multiplied by negative one."

You can't say that 3^2 is 3x3 (or 3•3), and then turn around and say that -(3x3) is equal to -3x3.

Which is what you did, and are apparently still doing. Did you learn this shit in Common Core, or something?

But it isn't.
-(2+2)^2+9 can be rewritten as:
"The sum of two and itself multiplied by negative one, squared, and then increased by nine."
Even if you distribute -1 instead of just solving for what's inside the parenthesis, the result is the same: (-2+-2)^2 = -1(4)^2. Your (intentional) mistake is multiplying 4^2, which is 4•4, by -1 LAST instead of FIRST.

Probably the easiest way to clear this up is to just rewrite it:
+(2 + 9)/(2 - 1) - 3^2
Nobody ever argues that this result is is 11 - 9 = 2. Also, see how I kept the + on the front? When written in the original order we have to keep the -, but it's the same damn concept.
But suddenly when you utilize the commutative property people lose their fucking minds.

Like I said in the last post: It all depends how you choose to interpret the poorly-written problem.

If you see it how it's properly implied, then you'll see it as:

-(3)^2
Which becomes -(3x3) leading to...
-(9) which becomes -9

Only if it's written out specifically as (-3)^2 will it become (-3 x -3) which then becomes 9.

For a final time: My way got the correct answer, because the people who created that program, the teachers, and the rest of the math world understands that when something is written as -3^2 then it's implied to be -(3)^2

I'm sorry your prior teachers have failed you bro. It really hurts my heart. I see kids suffering like this all the time, and I have to look up precisely what rule this applies to for them to accept it....provided they even care at all and are not screwing around with their phones.

>this result is is 11 - 9 = 2
*is not
>apparently can't type or proof for shit tonite

-1 * (3^2) + (2+9) / (2-1)

[-1 * 9] + [11 / 1]

(-9) + 11 = 2

if the negative were going to be included in the exponent, it would have been written as (-3)^2

PEMDAS.

You solve what's inside the parenthesis first, then exponent, then multiplication or division, then addition or subtraction.

You're multiplying by -1 two steps too soon bro. Look up examples of how PEMDAS is done.

You know what? I'll do it for you. Give me a second.

youtube.com/watch?v=Y3CZ_JBQ0do

Here you go. A perfect example. Just pretend the -2 on this video is a -1 and you'll see precisely what I did.

It's not poorly written--but not all of our mathematical abilities are well-maintained. Hence, the disagreement.

>but the implication
There is no implication. This is math. And since it was never explicitly stated that we're operating under your imaginary premise, the easiest assumption for random anons on the internet to make is that we're going with "vanilla" or "standard" math. Also known as "no, really, you've been studying this since the first grade," math.

But the less of my time you waste the better. Anyone who doesn't have your 26th chromosome can look at my previous posts and see the sense in them.

Enjoy fucking your customers out of their money and ensuring we'll never run out of Walmart cashiers.

Well I'm sorry you have a weaker grasp of how math works. There is an implication in that specific case. How about you bring the problem to a math teacher and see how they solve it. There's clearly something missing in your education, bro. I'd be pissed too if I found out an important aspect of math was not conveyed to me in a way where it became common understanding.

And all of my students who actually try get A's. Fucked or not, their parents feel it's money well spent.

That's in order from left to right, though, when the same numbers are involved. Or, rather, separated by different orders: -(2+2)^2 is one number. It just hasn't been solved for yet.

P first, yes? Then (2+2) comes first. Simple: (4).
E is next then...but we haven't solved for the base, which is -(4), which is equal to -1•4. Now that we have the base, -4, we can proceed: -4^2 = 16.

If the problem involved another step, -(2+2)^2/4, then this is the point where we'd move on to M or D.

2

-16

Fuck off.
Do your own homework, kid.

You know what? I think I just figured out where you're getting the -1 is distributed in to the parenthesis first from.

When you have a problem like below, you solve it via PEMDAS:
ex. -3(2+4)^3 +3
= -645

However, if an X is involved (aka an unknown variable X), then you distribute what's outside the parenthesis first since we're solving for X.

ex. -2(-3+X)^2 = 9
Distribute the -2 inside the parenthesis, you'll get.
(6-2X)^2 = 9
We need to isolate the X on one side, so to do that we need to take the square root of both sides of the equals sign to cancel out the ^2. We'll get
6-2X = 3
Now keep trying to isolate the X, we do this by subtracting 6 from both sides. We get
-2X = -6+3
-2X = -3
Finally, we need to isolate the X by dividing both sides by -2. We get
X = -3 / -2
X = 3/2

I think that's where you're getting confused. You only distribute numbers outside of the parenthesis when there's an X involved. In this case there's not, so we follow PEMDAS. Hope this helped you, or anyone reading this.

this is full blown retarded.
so am i for taking the bait.

(2+2) is 4
-(4)^2 is -(16) which is then -16.

Careful with where the parenthesis and exponents are located. The video does a fine job explaining this.

The problem is that it's not specified so different people perceive it in different ways.

But since there's no parentheses in the problem, I believe the final answer should be 2