/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2869247]

I had to draw the problem because there's no division sign and pinta seems to dislike the one I copied...

Anyway, the internet is shitting itself over this so I want to see what everyone thinks about it on here since this board seems to be more intelligent than most others.

[Anonymous No.2869249]

FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF

[Anonymous No.2869255]

>>2869249
Well... That was a bit harsh. I'm legitimately concerned with your thoughts on this. I didn't think you'd be so hostile. Perhaps you don't know...?

[Anonymous No.2869271]

Kill yourself

[Anonymous No.2869278]

>>2869271
I honestly don't see what the problem is here. This is pathetic. I guess you are all incredibly uptight about this. Anyway, I already found the other thread about this. It seems you really do have no idea.

>>2868521

[Anonymous No.2869279]

/sci/'s offical position on this problem is that its an obvious troll.

[Anonymous No.2869291]

>>2869271
This is copied directly from the rules:

1. All science and math related topics welcome.

Seeing as this is a math related topic, I don't think you have a valid case. This could have been an interesting thread. Those who think it's equal to 288 see the problem as equivalent to (48/2)(9+3) while those who think it's equal to 2 see the problem as equivalent to 48/(2*(9+3)).

The problem of deciding which is correct relies mainly on whether there is any implied multiplication. We could have discussed that but instead you'd rather not see maths discussed in /sci/.

I guess haters gonna hate.

[Anonymous No.2869302]

The answer is 2.
Now go back to school.

[Anonymous No.2869311]

>>2869302

The answer is 2

88

[Anonymous No.2869538]

This is a question of typography, not of math. Nobody uses the two-dots-and-a-line symbol for division, except American grad school children. In any serious math document the author or editor would use brackets or re-write the equation to make things clean. An expression such as a/b(c+d) would be rejected by any competent editor. Even if it is unambiguous, there are ways to write it which do not require the reader to think about the expression before understanding it.

<span class="math">\frac{a}{b} \times (c+d) [/spoiler] is unambiguous. All journals have extensive rules on the formatting of equations and such to avoid these kinds of problems.

Of course, that all being said, you could define / to be division before addition, and funky-american-division-symbol to be division after addition. Keep in mind these are nothing but symbols. I could write that as 481243596 and still claim the answer is 288. Or 2.

[Anonymous No.2869569]

>>2869538
>This is a question of typography
Except it's not.

[Anonymous No.2869574]

>>2869538

[Anonymous No.2869602]

>>2869569
yes it is. Thats how wolfram has interpreted it. You could just as easily interpret it as <span class="math">\frac{48}{2(3+9)}[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2869621]

When doing division/multiplication read left to right.
288

[Anonymous No.2869628]

>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538


For the love of god, THIS.

It is entirely dependent on if you parse this as <span class="math">\frac{48}{2(9+3)}[/spoiler] or <span class="math"> \frac{48}{2} * (9+3)[/spoiler]. In elementary school, they'd probably require you to do the latter, as you can break it up into <span class="math"> 48 * \frac{1}{2} * (9+3) [/spoiler]. However, this is primarily an issue of bad formatting, as I think most people who taken math beyond algebra are tempted to read this as the former, because that is what someone would probably mean in the real world if they wrote this.

Forgive me if the math didn't come out right, I'm new to TeX.

[Anonymous No.2869671]

>>2869538
You just went full retard.
2139483 is not equal to 288 or 2.
Nor is 48/2(3+9) equal to 2.
All symbols are well defined, the expression is well formed, and it has a unique solution, by definition. That solution is 288.

You can bitch that it is a retarded way to write 288, and I agree. But it is 288, and nothing else.

[Anonymous No.2869682]

Damn amateurs corrupting /sci/ with nonsense...

I drew up the solution for you. To eliminate all doubts of if this is correctly set up or not, I turned the division into multiplication, thusly creating a very simple math problem.

/thead

[Anonymous No.2869688]

It's just a new internet troll post. You know why they call it an Xbox 360? Because when you see it you turn 360 degrees and walk away.

I like it because it outs all the retards that like to talk about string theory and the big bang theory but can't do middle school arithmetic.

[Anonymous No.2869699]

>>2869688

Fucking retard. 360 is a whole circle, turning 360 will make you walk the way you were watching

[Anonymous No.2869704]

God bless you.

[Anonymous No.2869724]

>>2869699

You just got trolled by something explicitly stated as an example of a troll post.

[Anonymous No.2869728]

>>2869699
>Fucking retard

[Anonymous No.2869764]

I don't get why people even bother replying to this.

[. No.2869796]

<span class="math">\frac{48}{2}(3+9)[/spoiler]

<span class="math">\frac{48}{2}(3+9)[/spoiler]

<span class="math">\frac{48}{2}(3+9)[/spoiler]

<span class="math">\frac{48}{2}(3+9)[/spoiler]

<span class="math">\frac{48}{2}(3+9)[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2869862]

The answer is 288 for the following reason:

There is no reason to be reading 48/2*12 from right to left. But, there is reason to be doing it from left to right , simply because we read from left to right.

Divide and multiply have no precedence over each other so in the end you just have to do it from left to right.

Also Wolframalpha and Google say the answer is 288.

My physical calculator says the answer is 2 though.

[Anonymous No.2869880]

>>2869724
I believe (hope) it is you who got trolled..

[Anonymous No.2869883]

http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/order_operations.html

in my opinion you should get a 1 day ban

[Anonymous No.2869887]

>>2869764

Because they can't stand the thought that they interpreted a question incorrectly.

[Anonymous No.2870114]

derp

[Anonymous No.2870232]

>>2869671
Au contraire, my well-intentioned but blissfully unaware friend. The symbols we use for math are convention only. The represent a well-defined operation, but the symbols themselves are still just convention. You are following a set of rules because they are the only rules you know.

I'm surprised how many people think that the laws of commutation and distribution are universal. <span class="math"> a \times b[/spoiler] does not always equal <span class="math">b \times a[/spoiler]. In fact, past algebra you quickly get to situations where things must indeed be read left-to-right or they make no sense. Just as Euclidean geometry is not the only geometry, grade-school algebra is by far not the only algebra.

To the point, the question here is one of typography and rule interpretation. It's really one issue. Different people and different sciences use different interpretations, all of which are logically consistent. Care is to be taken to be clear about the context and meaning of your writing.

[Anonymous No.2870265]

I mean isn't even "math" as most of us view it. The majority of people on this board are interested in higher level math, or like to fancy themselves some kind of math professor.

It's like taking an idiot-savant who can tell you the cube root of 198 without thinking about it. He isn't really good at math per say.

[TheBiologist !!lTr9yohV4eK No.2870290]

>>2869671

It's convention that a plus sign makes 2+2=4. When doing a problem or reading literature, + is nearly always the operation that makes 2+2=4.

I could however define some type of addition (and use a plus sign for it) where a+b=2a+3b (though until you're in math classes past probably linear algebra there would never be a reason to do this).

Any space where my addition was defined wouldn't be a vector space as a+b=/=b+a so it is probably extremely counter intuitive for most people as vector spaces are what makes sense to you even if you haven't heard of them. That being said, you can define different types of operations and use whatever sign you desire as long as it isn't ambiguous to the reader

[Anonymous No.2870293]

Use the reciprocal rule:
48*.5*(3+9)=288

Any other answer, especially 2, is a troll. There have been at least three threads on this subject now, one of which went over 200 posts and was archived. Please stop.

[Anonymous No.2870295]

You use "/", you moron.

[TheBiologist !!lTr9yohV4eK No.2870323]

That being said,I myself would answer this question as 288.

Using the dot-dot sign for division is stupid as it can lead to shit like this and probably sets grade school students back on understanding division and fractions properly.

I would just multiply the terms in parenthesis and then read it left to right and just do whatever operations I came across. This is how arithmetic works. PEMDAS, remember?

[Anonymous No.2870332]

>>2870323

We called it "BEDMAS" For brackets. In any case, this shit is grade school stuff.

[Anonymous No.2870335]

>>2870265
>per say.

per se

[moon !glowluI8a6 No.2870652]

>>2869574
>>2869569
I'd just like to comment on this, you see, this is a problem of interpretation.

For example my calc interprets it in one way and google calculator in the other. Doesn't make any answer any truer because the problem is not properly defined and can be understood differently.

Yes, it's a shitty picture and yes, there's weed on my calculator. I don't even know how it got there.

[moon !glowluI8a6 No.2870656]

>>2870652
Forgot pic

[. No.2870664]

<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2870674]

>>2870335
>>2870335
it's a doggy dog world

[. No.2870680]

>>2870674
people take expressions like that for granite

[. No.2870737]

sup guys

[Anonymous No.2870764]

>>2870656
>>2870737
A challenger appears!

[Anonymous No.2870799]

>>2870737

your dick is either tiny or you´re fucking hairy.

just sayin

[. No.2870802]

>>2870656
>>2870737
>>2870764
WTF 3 casios and only one has the right answer. i'm glad I stuck with texas instruments

[Anonymous No.2870814]

>>2870737

it's funny because with the trollface and the red circle one doesn't see the penis at first and one's brain thinks it's a weird finger. Then one realises it's a penis. Then one realises you are a cutfag

[. No.2870861]

<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]

[. No.2870881]

<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]

[Max Planck !!jT+l3v7Nbt6 No.2870896]

>>2870802

THIS!

[Anonymous No.2870898]

<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2870908]

>>2870737
Holy SHIT that's a small dick.

[Anonymous No.2870933]

are there really so few people that are taught distribution??

the majority of calculators, online or not, do not know distribution

48/2(3+9)
48/(2*3+2*9)
48/(6+18)
48/24
2

got a little light reading for you as well


Symbols of grouping can be used to override the usual order of operations. Grouped symbols can be treated as a single expression. Symbols of grouping can be removed using the associative and distributive laws.

[Anonymous No.2870938]

>>2870737
What
the
fuck

your dick is literally the size of my index finger

[Anonymous No.2870949]

the answer is 2
(3+9) = 12*2 = 24

48/24=2

[Anonymous No.2870956]

This.

It's only ambiguous because it's DELIBERATELY written ambiguously.

[Anonymous No.2870958]

>>2870933

I thought this way too, but then what if we considered 48/2 to be a fraction and then distributed that.

2(a+b)= 2a +2b

48/2(3+9)
(48/2)3 + (48/2)9 = 72 + 216 = 288
48/2

[Anonymous No.2870966]

Well i'm just confused as fuck because i learned to do arithmetic using BEDMAS which would make the answer 2...yet my TI (and WA) says the answer is 288

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2870972]

>>2870966

>says he's understood the order of operations
>brags that his calc shows 288

[Anonymous No.2870973]

>>2870958

48/2 would only be a fraction if written that way or, and im not 100% sure about this cause i dont remember seeing it, if there was an extra multiplication between the 2 and the (3+9)

also found this on another site. it is a bit longer though
______

This topic is really part of studying the Order of Operations, but simplifying with parentheses is probably the sub-topic that causes students the most difficulty, so this lesson is meant to provide a little extra help in this area.
When simplifying expressions with parentheses, you will be applying the Distributive Property. That is, you will be distributing over (multiplying through) a set of parentheses in order to simplify a given expression. I will walk you through some examples of increasing difficulty, and you should note, as this lesson progresses, the importance of simplifying as you go and of doing each step neatly, completely, and exactly.

Simplify 3(x + 4).
To "simplify" this, I have to get rid of the parentheses. The Distributive Property says to multiply the 3 onto everything inside the parentheses. I sometimes draw arrows to emphasize this:
Then I multiply the 3 onto the x and onto the 4:
3(x) + 3(4)

3x + 12

Written all in one line, this would look like: Copyright © Elizabeth Stapel 2003-2011 All Rights Reserved


The most common error at this stage is to take the 3 through the parentheses but only onto the x, forgetting to carry it through onto the 4 as well. If you need to draw little arrows to help you remember to carry the multiplier through onto everything inside the parentheses, then use them!

_______
obviously there are a cpl little drawings missing but it should make sense

[Anonymous No.2870977]

>>2870966

That's because your calculator is correct, and you're failing at arithmetic. (left to right)

[Anonymous No.2870988]

>>2870956
i don't understand the comic ;_;

[Anonymous No.2870997]

Seriously, do people not understand this?

Order of operations.

Don't suck at it.

288 is answer.

Why does this thread keep popping up all over the place?

It's worse than that young whore singing...

Friday

[Anonymous No.2870999]

>48/2(3+9)
>48/2(12)
>24(12)
>288

hurr durr durr hurr

[Anonymous No.2871011]

>>2870999
>48/2(3+9)
>48/2(12)
>48/24
>2

hurr durr durr hurr

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2871031]

>>2870977

Why do I have to read this left-to-right bullshit so often?. It's only applicable because the most common definition for ÷ and / is creating an inverse multiplicant until it encounters an equal or lower order of operation.

If you apply this 'standard' definition, there is no '2' but just a <span class="math">2^{-1}[/spoiler].

And now don't get at me with shit like 'But we could change that definition of 2(9+3) into (2(9+3)) or turn / into a fraction bar!'

>implying parenthesis

[Anonymous No.2871042]

Math grad student here. Lots of trolls and/or retards in this thread. There is no "left to right rule". The problem is ambiguous and has no unique solution.

>>2869538
>>2869538
>>2869538

This is correct.

>>2869671

0/10

[Anonymous No.2871063]

>>2871011

Quint > Dub

[Anonymous No.2871122]

>>2871042
this is internet, there is a left to right rule so you can shove your credentials and pencil up your ass.

[Anonymous No.2871131]

>>2871063
>Quint

he only got trips, u fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.2871244]

>>2871131

Are we in an alternate dimension where trips < dubs?

[Nakho !BHcbYlI0yc No.2871266]

>>2869764
fucking /thread

[Anonymous No.2871320]

>>2870737
>>2870737
>>2870737

[Anonymous No.2871354]

2x3 + 2x9 = 24

48/24 = 2

What's so hard about that?

[Anonymous No.2871453]

The /sci/ official stance:

The expression is ambiguous for several reasons. They all boil down to a question of the application of operations. Division and multiplication are of the same order in that they represent reciprocal operations. However, in practice multiplication often precedes division. For example, the text h/2e is universally understood to be the same as <span class="math">\frac{h}{2e}[/spoiler], not <span class="math">\frac{he}{2}[/spoiler]. This is because equations and expressions are much more useful with variables than with numbers. Hence, the real problem is one of typography and editing. Legitimate publications would avoid an expression such as 48/2(3+9) because it is ambiguous, at least at first glance. Even though strict application of regular math rules gives this to be equivalent to 288, an answer of 2 is just as reasonable given the implicit multiplication as opposed to the explicit division. Context matters, too. Such an expression would likely only follow a formula such as <span class="math">a \times \frac{b}{c}[/spoiler] which makes the intention clear.

You cannot appeal to authority such as google, mathematica, or a calculator to give you the answer. Those sources use rules of their own definition. They give the correct answer for their own particular interpretation. Garbage in, garbage out.

Much like most other such questions on here, the issue is not the math but the purposefully ambiguous definition of the problem. Any sort of context would resolve the issue clearly. Of course, that's not the point...

[Anonymous No.2871503]

>>2871453

This is nice but many people will TLDR.

Where is the fuggin picture of the two TI calculators next to each other displaying the two different responses despite the fact that they were typed in the same way?

Can't believe I didn't save that shit to my folder.

[Anonymous No.2871506]

>>2871122

HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. Don't hurt yourself, faggot.

[Anonymous No.2871514]

the answer is 288, anybody who claims anything else is a fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.2871525]

>>2871453
tl;dr
Official /sci/ stance is: <span class="math">\frac{48}{2}(3+9)=24 \cdot (3+9)=24 \cdot 12=288[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\rm LEARN~HOW~TO~ORDER~OF~OPERATIONS~AND~STOP~BITCHING~ABOUT~AMBIGUITY,~N00BS[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2871548]

>>2871525
Boy will you be surprised if you ever discover functionals. I find it funny that those who know the least about a topic are the fastest to call others retarded.

[Anonymous No.2871634]

>>2871548
irrelevant post is irrelevant
GJ with that brah

[Anonymous No.2871657]

<span class="math">~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~lolwat[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2871684]

>>2871525

Too bad you're wrong.

[Anonymous No.2871688]

>>2871506
>>2871514
>>2871525
>>2871634

[Anonymous No.2871693]

<span class="math">~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~288.[/spoiler]

<span class="math">~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[/spoiler]>>2871684

[Anonymous No.2871720]

<span class="math">\rm{CORRECT:}\frac{48}{2}(3+9)[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\rm{INCORRECT:}\frac{48}{2(3+9)}[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2871728]

>>2870988
There are three words in [the sentence], "The English language."

[Anonymous No.2871755]

Wait guys.. if the answer is 288 if you read it left to right, does that mean in Japan the answer is 2?

[Anonymous No.2872508]

>>2870737

[Anonymous No.2872511]

There are two answers to the problem:
1) You follow standard mathematical notation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_notation))

48/2(9+3) ---Given
48/2*(9+3) --Parenthesis means multiplication[1][2]
48/2*12 ------Parenthesis first[3][4][5]
24*12 ---------Multiplication and Division have equal value, so you go left to right[3][4][5]
288 -------------Multiplication

Or I could use the distributive property so the parenthesis' order doesn't bother you:
48/2(9+3) --------------Given
(48/2)(9)+(48/2)(3) --Distributive property[6][7]
216+72 -----------------Simplification
288 -----------------------Addition

REMEMBER: Multiplication and division are of equal value in BE-DM-AS and PE-MD-AS.
When Parenthesis, Brackets and Exponents are solved, you solve multiplication and Division left to right, not one sign then the other.[8][9][10][11]

[1] http://cstl.syr.edu/fipse/algebra/unit2/parenth.htm
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplication#Notation_and_terminology
[3] http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/order_operations.html
[4] http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops.htm
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
[6] http://www.glencoe.com/sec/math/brainpops/00112041/00112041.html
[7] http://math.about.com/od/algebra/a/distributive.htm
[8] http://www.mathsisfun.com/operation-order-pemdas.html
[9] http://www.studygs.net/pemdas/
[10] http://www.ehow.com/how_4449191_solve-math-problem-using-pemdas.html
[11] http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol7/operations_exponents.html

One compiler and a few websites solving the problem:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=48%2F2(9%2B3)
http://codepad.org/XD8sjmQO
http://www.mathway.com/answer.aspx?p=basi?p=48SMB102%289+3%29?p=2?p=?p=?p=?p=?p=?p=?p=0?p=?p=

2) You don't follow standard mathematical notation:
This question is too ambiguous to solve, or the solution is whatever you want it to be. It could even be 2.

[Anonymous No.2872528]

>>2870674
Thanks, made my day.

[Anonymous No.2872670]

<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{derp^{herp^{derp^{herp^{derp}}}}}[/spoiler]<span class="math">{herp_{derp_{herp_{derp_{herp}}}}}[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2872789]

It's easy to see who the americans are in these threads.

[Anonymous No.2873089]

>>2872789

[_ No.2873236]

<span class="math">[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.2873240]

>>2869247
288

[Anonymous No.2873265]

>>2869247
26, faggot.

Go away now.

[_ No.2873274]

Some people say that <span class="math">48\div2(3+9)=288,[/spoiler] others say that <span class="math">48\div2(3+9)=2.[/spoiler] The answer must be somewhere in between..

[Anonymous No.2873280]

well, /sci's obviously up the chute tonite. think i'll go see what's up at /ck/

[Anonymous No.2873285]

>>2872789

It's easy to see the ESL in these threads.

[_ No.2873304]

>>2872511 THE ONLY POST WORTH READING IN THIS ENTIRE THREAD.
<span class="math"> [/spoiler]
<span class="math"> [/spoiler]
<span class="math"> [/spoiler]
ALSO TINY COCK
>>2870737