Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Mumsnet classics

Relive the funniest, most unforgettable threads. For a daily dose of Mumsnet’s best bits, sign up for Mumsnet's daily newsletter.

Original poster

40+40x0+1 ?

539 replies

minimuffy · 09/11/2011 19:48

40 + 40 x 0 + 1 =

A- 1
B- 41
c- 0

I say its B-41 as you need to multiply then add. (from what i remember of standard grade maths the acroymym BOMDAS- brackets off, multiply, divide, add, subtract)

DH says its 1.

please tell he's wrong!

OP posts:
GrimmaTheNome · 10/11/2011 13:33

nickel - or a clause, would that be correct grammatical analogy?

GrimmaTheNome · 10/11/2011 13:32

Grin Dilys - I'm sure he knows better than to court the wrath of a Militant Logician!

ChocolateBiscuitCake · 10/11/2011 13:31

so 2.4 rounds down to 2, and 2.5 rounds up to 5

Umm: so 2.4 rounds down to 2, and 2.5 rounds up to 3 Grin

nickelbabe · 10/11/2011 13:29

I always see anything with a / or a x as a complete sentence.

so 40 + 40 x 0 + 1 looks like 40 + 40x0 + 1 to me.

DilysPrice · 10/11/2011 13:29

I haven't read the whole thing, so don't know if I'm the first to say "Divorce Him". Seriously, if my DH tried to pull shit like that he'd be on a warning. But to be fair my degree is in symbolic logic (aka Brackets).

GrimmaTheNome · 10/11/2011 13:18

Look in here under 'Tie-breaking' if you really want to do your head in understand the whys and wherefores of rounding (hint - if you thought the answer to the OP was 1 you might not want to go her Wink)

I was taught this: 'The rule is, if the next digit is: 5 or more, we 'round up'. 4 or less, it stays as it is.' (copied from GCSE BiteSize, so what I'd expect our kids to be learning). And in over quarter a century of scientific algorithm development I've never seen anything else used.

nickelbabe · 10/11/2011 13:16

when you round, you round up if it's below .5 and up if it's .5 or above.

so 2.4 rounds down to 2, and 2.5 rounds up to 5.

that's also a reason why it's very important never to round before your final answer.
eg:
give this answer to 1 decimal place
2.34+2.35+2.38+3.69+3.89=

if you round on each part, you get 14.5
but if you round at the end you get = 14.65 = 14.7

glasscompletelybroken · 10/11/2011 13:08

10,000 something - 10,000 something = 10,000 something else.

Discuss.

TotemPole · 10/11/2011 13:07

We were taught the same as LittleMissGreen, x.5 round up or down to the nearest even. So 2.5 rounds down to 2, 3.5 rounds up to 4.

Anything slightly under or over .5 then you round to the nearest whole.
.49 round down, .51 round up, regardless of even or odd.

Alouisee · 10/11/2011 12:48

PacificDogwood you sound like my dh when my poor children are struggling with their homework.

He can stick Fibonacci numbers up his bum too :o

noblegiraffe · 10/11/2011 12:45

And yet, Dewe, 2.49 recurring is equal to 2.5

Which is brilliant but I'm not sure some people on this thread are ready for that if mere bidmas is messing with their minds :)

poppyknot · 10/11/2011 11:07

It's 3.14!

From twitter.........

Ha! RT @Micky_Jay: @standupmaths 40+40x0+1=3.14. If you give me 40 apples + 40 apples x 0 apples +1 apple....I'm gunna make me some pie!!!

TheVermiciousKnid · 10/11/2011 10:48

This thread shows how many people only read the original post before posting. Grin

RustyBear · 10/11/2011 10:44

Have just tried again and discovered that if I put in 40+40x0 and then press= then I get 40, to which I can then add 1 to get 41. But if I put the whole sum in at once I get 81 - on both portrait and landscape, which must be the way I did it the first time when it got it right. Confused

PacificDogwood · 10/11/2011 10:42

But, Alouisee, the rules are clear. And consistent. And always the same. And the same anywhere. And therefore beautiful.

As opposed to relationship 'rules'.
Or fashion 'rules'

Now, quantum maths . I understand just enough about it to know that I don't understand it. Which is quite quantumy in its own right Grin

DeWe · 10/11/2011 10:24

"But 2.5 rounds to 2 as 2 is an even number. 3.5 would round to 4 as it is odd."

That has to be the most bizarre statement I've heard in a long time. Where on earth did that come from? Confused

If you are rounding to the nearest whole number, you always round up at the half way point. eg. 2.5 rounds up to 3, 3.5 rounds up to 4.

So 2.4999999999999999 (recurring 9) rounds down to 2, 2.5 rounds up to 3.

SoupDragon · 10/11/2011 10:23

The iPad one definitely ignres the x 0 par of the calculation and gives 81.

Almondroca001 · 10/11/2011 10:22

41

SoupDragon · 10/11/2011 10:21

My iPad made it 1601 but I rather think that;s because i didn't clear the previous calculation :o

Alouisee · 10/11/2011 10:20

Maths is such a fucking conspiracy, which twat made up the rules in the first place? I hate him whoever it was.

PacificDogwood · 10/11/2011 10:19

I did well at Higher Maths.
I know the Rules.
But - I am a Numpty

RustyBear · 10/11/2011 10:19

I did it several times. I'm supposed to be at work, but it's breaktime in a few miniutes so I'll try again then

RustyBear · 10/11/2011 10:17

It seemed to totally ignore the 'x0' instruction, very odd...

GrimmaTheNome · 10/11/2011 10:16

Are you sure you typed it in correctly Rusty? Otherwise - well obviously in landscape everything is fatter

TotemPole · 10/11/2011 10:14

How did it get 81?

Swipe left for the next trending thread