#mathequation

Here is the equation:

8÷2(2+2)=?

Before we dive into this problem, I want to present you with an example from grammar:

“I would like to thank my two dads, Elton John and Cher.”

Now…. when you look at that sentence, which has omitted the Oxford comma, technically the rules of grammar state that the sentence is saying that the speakers two dads are Elton John & Cher. However, we can figure out from context, that he’s probably thanking four people: his two dads, Elton John, and Cher. However, technically both versions of the sentence could be correct: maybe he has two dads named Elton John and Cher. We don’t know, but we can deduce.

Ok. Back to this equation.

8÷2(2+2)=?

Both 1 and 16 are technically correct answers to this equation.

If we do a strict PEDMAS order of operations solving, I am going to insert a symbol (just like the omitted Oxford comma) to make this equation make sense. The answer becomes:

However… that pesky little multiplication symbol was omitted. So we don’t actually know what the person writing the equation intended. So maybe we deduce that the person was using the “divided by” symbol because they couldn’t use 2 lines of text for the equation:

By looking at the equation and context clues, I would guess that the intended solution was 1. That the omission of the multiplication symbol outside of the parenthesis likely means that that portion was supposed to be taken as 1 section. However, just like in my 2 dads scenario, both are technically correct. And that’s why this equation is blowing up on Twitter.