
8÷2(2+2) =? - tosh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaitsBUyiNQ
======
tedmiston
To save you the watch...

    
    
        8 / 2 (2 + 2)
        = 8 / 2 (4)
        = 4 (4)
        = 16
    

It's easy to accidentally arrive at a result of 1 by mistake by doing 2 * 4
"bottom up" after the second line instead of applying multiplication &
division left to right.

Surprisingly I've seen an older Casio scientific calculator given an incorrect
answer of 1.

~~~
simonblack
BODMAS.

is

BRACKETS then OF then DIVISION then MULTIPLICATION Then ADDITION then
SUBTRACTION

8 / 2(2 + 2)

8 / 2(4)

8 / 8

= 1

> Surprisingly I've seen an older Casio scientific calculator given an
> incorrect answer of 1

LOL.

The brackets bind tighter than the division sign. _It 's a trick question._

What the 16 proponents are seeing is

(8/2) x (2+2)

    
    
      (4) x (4)
    
       (16)
    

What the brackets are doing though is

(8) / (2 x (2 +2))

(8) / (2 x 4)

(8) / (8)

(1)

~~~
tedmiston
But the extra set of parentheses added here in your reply is not part of the
original equation:

    
    
        (8) / (2 x (2 +2))
              ^          ^
    

I don't follow why you don't do the multiplication left to right after the
expression inside the parentheses has been evaluated. Once the parentheses
(PEMDAS) precedence has been applied to result in 8 / 2 * 4, then it should
just be standard multiplication and division left to right, right?

[https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%3D%208%20%2F%202%20(2...](https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%3D%208%20%2F%202%20\(2%20%2B%202\))

~~~
simonblack
The extra set of brackets is an attempt to show that the '2' in front of the
bracket is shorthand for '2 x'

i.e 2(...) = (2x(...))

but that '2' is part of the whole brackets expression and should be evaluated
as such.

As I mentioned before, this is really a trick question, and meant to be
deliberately ambiguous.

