It's -10. No discussion needed.
It's -10. No discussion needed
so why'd you post faggot
the answer is cucumber.
Answer is -4 you mug
Wow Op got it right
Still a faggot though
he's a faggot. why does no one ever post "OP is a fag" anymore?
sage
answer is 2 faggot.
Haha you dumb as fuck
I study mathematics and the answer is 8, believe or not, but I'm 100% right!
Another retard
Do post your step by step proof of this answer
sage goes in all fields
Please explain how you get -4 "mug"
Its -10 you fucking mongaliods
-24
/thread
-3 * 4 is -12
(2)-12 = 2 * -12 = -24
2-3*4
-1*4
-4
Izi
...
you are the dumbest person I have ever seen on the entire internet
The answer is the amount of OP's non-faggotry
...
bro
I want you to go into the catalog, and give me one thread that wouldn't be less of a waste of my time than to do bait math equations.
spoiler alert: Sup Forums is shit
The answer is "calculator" because fuck math.
2-3*4
2-12 = -10
op is a retard its -4
Nice one faggot
Answer is -20 faggots
let us analyze the problem
we see that these are most likely numbers
and because there is a "minus" operation, we are most likely working in the integers
so let us construct the integers
first, let us look at the category of sets, with morphisms corresponding to set inclusion (aka, the grothendieck topology)
we first wish to examine the subcategory induced by the "successor functor", S
we identify the empty set with the symbol 0
and we look at the product in this category, which is analogous to addition of natural numbers
then we impose this rule on the successor functor and product
a + 0 = a
a + S(b) = S(b) + a
one can easily check that this is unique
we now wish to prove that the image of the successor functor is isomorphic to the natural numbers
cont.
>2-3*4
>-1*4
>-4
>Izi
Please excuse my dear aunt Sally. She's retarded and doesn't know any better.
this is so cancerous it gave me a real headache.
>2*4=8
>8-3=5
answer is 5 faggots