Texas Instruments vs Casio Calculator Fail
Rating: 4.53 |
(Hint: Use number keys to rate)
(Hint: Use number keys to rate)
10.04.2011 - 16:03:02 <anon> oeoeoe
10.04.2011 - 16:05:22 <anon> that's why you need to use parenthesis dumbass...
10.04.2011 - 16:16:05 <anon> mä laskin laskimella ni tuli 2.00000
10.04.2011 - 16:16:38 <anon> Actually, no, you shouldn't need to, as there is a hierarchy of mathematical devices, and multiplication and division should be on the same level. As such, the parenthesis forces that to be solved first, so as to resolve the addition which would otherwise be a lower order device. After that, everything else is solves left -> right, so 48/2=24, 24*12=288.
10.04.2011 - 16:25:59 <anon> noob
10.04.2011 - 16:48:15 <anon> TI-86: 288
10.04.2011 - 17:07:01 <anon> reverse polish notation noobs
10.04.2011 - 17:12:05 <anon> Ensin sulut, sitten vasemmalta oikealle kerrot ja jaot. Eli 48/2(9+3) -> 48/2*12 -> 24*12 -> 288.
10.04.2011 - 17:31:39 <anon> fx-991ES rullas
10.04.2011 - 17:51:03 <anon> 2 is right, im sure.
10.04.2011 - 18:01:21 <anon> The rule is PARANTHESIS FIRST. 48/2(9+3) -> 48/2(12) -> 48/24 = 2.
10.04.2011 - 18:21:11 <anon> After you evaluate 9+3, 2(9) is just multiplication and the priority as division. The casio has it right as far as I'm concerned.
10.04.2011 - 18:30:33 <anon> kumpikin on oikein, varma tieto
10.04.2011 - 18:33:28 <anon> HP users giggle at this...
10.04.2011 - 18:33:30 <anon> Looks like the Casio uses RPN (reverse polish notation)
10.04.2011 - 18:37:08 <anon> TI-30X IIB : 288
10.04.2011 - 18:38:49 <anon> Saatana jouduin tarkistaa...TI86kin laskee oikein. =)
10.04.2011 - 18:39:02 <anon> Siis 85.
10.04.2011 - 18:40:23 <anon> 288
10.04.2011 - 18:43:09 <anon> This was a problem we had to solve when I was in shcool, we're talking back in the 70's here. About half the class got 2, about half got 288 (some of course got neither). It stems from there being about 10 different mathematical order systems that are taught by different teachers. It's a deliberatly poor problem used by the NWO to seperate good from evil.
10.04.2011 - 18:54:41 <anon> http://www.pakkotoisto.com/yleinen-keskustelu/99824-48-2-9-3-288-vai-2-a/
10.04.2011 - 19:16:57 <anon> Google says 288: http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&biw=1178&bih=763&q=48%2F2%289%2B3%29&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=48%2F2*%289%2B3%29&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=53fd2b5286cafcf7&pf=p&pdl=300
10.04.2011 - 19:19:13 <anon> lol. Memory overflow on TI-85
10.04.2011 - 21:06:29 <anon> The TI-85 is correct. You distribute the 2 into the parentheses first (or multiply it by the sum inside)
10.04.2011 - 21:45:25 <anon> Typical Texas mathematics
10.04.2011 - 21:59:35 <anon> type 48/2(9+3) in google
10.04.2011 - 23:03:10 <anon> they are both correct. Because the sign for divisions are different the left one is like a fraction the right one is a direct divison. Since a fraction is like (48):(2*(9+3)) its correct but without a fraction it s 48:2=24*(9+2)=288
10.04.2011 - 23:48:17 <anon> ketä helvettii nää oikeesti kiinnostaa? vitun nörtit =DD
11.04.2011 - 01:58:18 <anon> wtf man, order of operations, they arent both right, 2 is right. PEMDAS. pregnant enchiladas masturbate daily and shit. everyone know this, parenthesis exponents multiplication (or) division addition (or) subtraction from left to right
11.04.2011 - 02:34:06 <anon> well i think the calc on the right solves it as it should be acording to mathematical hierarchy (e.g. parenthesis first then / and the *) wich would be like this: 48/2(9+3)=48/2(12) since you can't now multiply 2*(12) because it's not possible according to the hierarchy you have to divide first so: 48/2(12)=24*12=288... I don't why the TI calc calculates it as if it's a fraction where 48 is the top number of the fraction and 2*(9+3) it the bottom then the 2 would make sense...
11.04.2011 - 02:37:24 <anon> re: I know that / and * are on the same level but I don't look at it that way because with division you have to keep the correct order of the numbers (left to right) but with multiplication you don't have to so I think division is a bit higher...
11.04.2011 - 09:14:26 <anon> laskin saman niin tulin tulokseen 48350439046373045294760426 !
11.04.2011 - 09:51:14 <anon> TI-85 <3
11.04.2011 - 15:24:03 <anon> questions different -> no guarantee answers the same
11.04.2011 - 15:53:30 <anon> kiinnostuskiikarit
11.04.2011 - 16:04:30 <anon> eikö se nyt vitun amikset mene kaaliin, että casio on oikeessa. ne vitun sulut häpyy toimituksen 9+3 jälkeen. sillonhan se on 48/2*12 eli 288. jos minä lyhyellä matikalla voin laskea ton päässä nii voi vittu jos joku ei muka osaa.
11.04.2011 - 18:04:56 <anon> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
11.04.2011 - 19:52:11 <anon> haista vittu t. kikki hiiri
11.04.2011 - 21:03:13 <anon> LIIAN LAISKA KÄYTTÄMÄÄN SITÄ VITUN KERTOMERKKIÄ?
11.04.2011 - 21:06:16 <anon> Both are correct: http://www.google.fi/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Feducation.ti.com%2Fdownloads%2Fguidebooks%2Fgraphing%2F85%2F85book-eng.pdf&rct=j&q=ti-85%20manual&ei=f0CjTc_8NMqhOvmr8TQ&usg=AFQjCNHzFINltlJBqG0e_SfdRIy2lQZgNg&cad=rja pg 1-8 or number 44 in PDF
12.04.2011 - 14:30:31 <anon> The following talks about / but the same problem also applies to ÷ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Gaps_in_the_standard
12.04.2011 - 17:20:36 <anon> impessive
21.04.2011 - 14:27:43 <anon> 2 on oikein
21.04.2011 - 14:29:39 <anon> 42/2x12=2 u cannot devide before multiplying so its 42/24=2
24.06.2011 - 14:01:27 <anon> http://www.google.se/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=48%2F2(9%2B3) Google knows
09.07.2011 - 22:04:08 <anon> 288 on oikein, ensin lasketaan 9+=12, sit jako&kertolaskut vasemmalta oikealle 48/2=24, 24*12=288 MOT QED
02.09.2011 - 17:46:38 <anon> Windows laskin sanoo että ilman kertomerkkiä 4, kertomerkillä 288.
03.09.2011 - 10:04:08 <anon> ottakaas kynä ja paperi käteen: ylös 48 alle jakoviiva ja viivan alle 2(9+3), ni tulos on 2!!! Jos haluaa 288 ni pitäs merkitä (48/2)(9+3)...
28.12.2011 - 16:55:00 <anon> in texas calculates troll you
28.12.2011 - 16:55:11 <anon> in rest of fuckign world ppl troll calcs
28.12.2011 - 16:55:21 <anon> and with texas i mean whole americuntlands
08.04.2012 - 23:51:44 <anon> Americunt technology trash
20.05.2012 - 10:31:15 <anon> tulin laskimelle
23.07.2012 - 14:24:45 <anon> 288 is correct. the TI device has a precedence problem in which order it does the math
12.08.2012 - 13:37:58 <anon> retarded picture
12.08.2012 - 23:32:47 <anon> TI-89 -> 288
29.01.2013 - 20:31:37 <anon> 2,121212121212121
21.02.2013 - 00:56:04 <anon> degnoloji sax :DDDDD
15.05.2013 - 18:15:13 <anon> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
20.05.2013 - 20:15:25 <anon> Fyysikoille ja matemaatikoille 2 on oikea tulos (implikoitu kertolasku > jakomerkki), mutta riippuen julkaisusta myös 288 on OK.
20.05.2013 - 20:17:31 <anon> ^^ Wolfram Alpha muutti vasta vähän aikaa sitten kertolaskua siten, että 2x = 2 * x, eikä (2x).
01.09.2013 - 13:59:10 <anon> opettajalla on 48 omenaa jaettavana kahden luokan kesken, molemmissa luokissa on 9 oppilasta ja 3 on tukiopetuksessa. Montako omenaa per oppilas? No 288 tietenkin, ei 2...
25.04.2014 - 09:15:08 <anon> Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally
17.02.2015 - 04:42:36 <anon> https://math.berkeley.edu/~gbergman/misc/numbers/ord_ops.html
19.03.2015 - 23:53:27 <anon> my casio fx-85gt plus (natural/vpam) gives 2 as result
09.06.2015 - 00:23:52 <anon> teksasin matikka
09.06.2015 - 00:26:18 <anon> 482(9+3)=482x12=24x12=288
11.08.2015 - 16:24:02 <anon> muunna jakolaskut käänteisiksi kertolaskuiksi eli: 48 * 1/2 * 12 = 288
11.08.2015 - 16:26:35 <anon> niin ja jos joku vitun idiootti alkaa vielä vinkumaan tuo ylläoleva 1/2 ei ole jaksolasku vaan murtoluku
22.12.2015 - 03:51:20 <anon> funny how many people here dont know how to do maths
17.11.2017 - 15:06:42 <anon> Next time someone post a retard picture like this, or a retarded riddle on facebook, the key to the right answer is PEMDAS
04.05.2022 - 20:08:10 <anon> You all dingbats are wrong. The challenge is not mathematical. It is logical. If your approach is dogmatic, you lose. The logical solution is this: 2(9+3) is a SINGLE number. You don't get to parse it out according to your understanding of correct math 'syntax'. Splitting that number for display allows a teacher to insert a variable in there, otherwise it is pointless to describe a complete number as a formula. Otherwise, 2(9+3) is a different way to express '24'.
21.01.2023 - 13:42:22 <anon> 2(9+3) viittaa yhteen arvoon vähän niinkuin 2x. 48/2x niin tuleeko siitä vittu 24x häh? Numero/kirjain sulkujen/kirjaimen edessä on kerroin sille sulkujen sisällölle. 2(9+3) tarkoittaa 2kpl 9+3.
08.11.2025 - 16:11:31 <anon> Stop jerk off. I know a site where thousands of single girls are waiting to be fucked. Look at them: https://ja.cat/apn
27.11.2025 - 20:00:28 <anon> Quick sex with hot girls, come on in(click>>) https://ja.cat/finn ❤️
28.11.2025 - 03:35:36 <anon> Stop jerk off. I know a site where thousands of single girls are waiting to be fucked. Look at them: https://ja.cat/NU17
28.11.2025 - 09:12:02 <anon> ❤️ SEXCHAT with single girls > https://ja.cat/APINA