Divide or multiply first does not matter. Order of operations dictate you divide or multiply first (in any order). And then do subtraction or addition second (in any order). Example: (8 * 4) / 2 = 32 /2 = 16 8 * (4 /2) = 8 * 2 = 16 (5 + 6) - 4 = 11 - 4 = 7 5 + (6 - 4) = 5 + 2 = 7
It matters. changes the context of the question 48/2(12); can be see as (48/2) * 12 or 48 / (2 *12); changes whether the 12 is in the denominator or numerator. big difference Divide first: 24(12) = 288 Multiple first: 48/24 = 2 288 is the correct answer as you divide first in order of operations. Multi/divide are the same weight but it goes left to right. iirc
Actually it's just semantics again. Of course the tree does what the tree does. Nothing changes that. The real question is, what exactly is sound? Vibration itself does not equal 'sound'. Sound is subjective, it is the interpretation of vibrations by an eardrum. Without the eardrum, there is no sound, only vibrations. Ergo, while obviously the falling tree makes whatever vibrations it is going to make, regardless of whether or not anything 'hears' it, there is no actual 'sound' without ears to hear it. So it's not a philosophical question at all, rather just splitting hairs about the definition of the word 'sound'.
You are correct. Kind of. My bad. It does make a difference but it's not divide before multiply. It's Left to Right. Division and multiplication have the same level of importance.
So it's not sound unless there's something there to process it and 'hear' it. If I didn't have the sense of hearing, I would just feel some wind and so no sound was produced as far as I'm concerned. Got it. That makes sense to me.
You are in a dark room with 100 coins. 12 are heads side up and 88 are tails side up. It is too dark to see which is which. Divide the coins into two piles, such that each pile has the same number of head side up coins. Answer: Spoiler move twelve coins into a separate pile and flip them. Done.
Explain that. Spoiler How do you know that you're flipping the right ones?!?!? Doesn't make sense to do that and finish the problem. Yeah, sort of. Step on him hard... you know? DAMN,YOU! :grin: Yes, I meant "stump." REP.
Spoiler Lets say all 12 that I moved ended up being the heads-up coins(Hs). Now teh small pile has 12 Hs and the large pile 0. You flip every coin in the small pile and now both have 0 Hs so they are equal. Lets say none of the 12 that I moved ended up being the heads-up coins(Hs). Now the small pile has 0 Hs and the the large pile has 12 Hs. You flip every coin in the small pile and now both have 12 Hs so they are equal. Lets say 5 of the 12 that I moved ended up being the heads-up coins(Hs). Now the small pile has 5 Hs and the the large pile has 7 (12-5) Hs. You flip every coin in the small pile and now both have 7 Hs so they are equal (the small pile had 5 Hs and 7 Ts pre-flip and the reverse after). Hope that explains it
<br> This is exactly what I was trying to get at, because we know the 1st child is a boy. The second child's sex is a 50/50 toss up. I guess it is the wording of the question, but I took it to already have given us the sex of the first child.. <br> This was my point with the card scenario. Because the order is unknown in that instance, the answer isn't just 1/2 in that case.
No, logically, it doesn't explain it. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE 88? There's no 0 pile. Why didn't you mess with those 88 and what guarantees you get the right ones?? That's F&cked up, man, you probably don't even know the riddle or question yourself, do you?
If you re-arrange the pieces of the upper "triangle" to form the lower "triangle", a square goes missing. Can you explain? Please note that the pieces in both pictures are identical. use spoiler tags for the answer
It's easier if I spoiler it, since you asked: Spoiler The rearrangement is not the same. Look at the blue triangle and at the turquoise triangle in both drawings. We will call the top large formation A and the bottom formation B. We will call the bottom side of these two smaller triangles their X axis. Let's say that both figure A and figure B's bottom line starts at 0 on the bottom left. If you move along the bottom X axis of the turquoise triangle on figure A and count FOUR gridlines, the top side which seems to be 30° doesn't reach the 2nd gridline on the Y axis. On the bottom figure, the blue triangle reaches the 2nd gridline.
Spoiler This is basically right, if you do the math with the squares, you find the blue and turquoise triangles do not have the same slope (2/5 vs 3/8). So the aggregate shape is actually not a large triangle but a four sided polygon, with a barely noticeable concave shape for the top arrangement, and a convex shape for the bottom arrangement
