Video

4 steps, Ans: 1 + (sqr(2))/4

Too long. You need to learn to do short videos

[16 /4square]=[1] x 16 =16

I thought I was good at math until I came across this channel. That being said, I did get this one right. Math was a real struggle in 7th grade because I felt intimidated. As a result, I was put in a slower math class the next year. This gave me more time to learn it. I found out that I loved math. I continued at a slower pace for the rest of HS, so I didn't get to learn as much. As I try to figure out these problems, a lot is coming back to me. I think I would like to take a refresher course.

Use formula BODMAS Bracket of division multiply add subtract ko

32

D.

D

Too much tangential talk. Not math tangential.

Answer is 16

1

16

OMG...so EZ

16

I came here to see how someone could take 16 minutes to solve log8/log6. Ridiculous.

its 1

16. 20sec. In my head..

b= 2 is the answer

9

16

I see that so many of 'us' are mentally agile enough to solve these problems in less than 10 secs in their head!! And age is no handicap - I am a young, sprightly, 85yo, and solve quite easily all algebra, and 99% of calculus, that this great contributor lays before us!! I never went to university ( although I did have a 'place' offered at Southampton in 1959 to read Statistics ) so there are limits on just how much I can recall; but where memory may sometimes fail me - I reconstruct methods using empiric examples!! CHEERS!! :)

25

16/16x16...16

Funny how I'm being told that "I need to focus" when I have ADHD.

Thank you

This is the rule: Inside the bracket always go first. Multiplication/division is (equal weight and left first) must before addition/subtraction.

18 divided by ½ = 36. 18/2=9. So which is it?

16

Yeas! Did it in my head...less 30 seconds. AND, got it right. Hey, sometimes I'm good😊

16

17 in 3, 2, 1

1

16.

Lakhs of thousands of problems are there.. First solve those problems, then come to here.. this is simple comparing those issues.. if there really brain in the head would not post like this.. brain becomes drain that is why...😮😲😲🤪

you talk too much

12

I would suggest in real world application to convert 8.67 Hrs to 8Hrs 40 Mins, because not everyone knows 0.67 is approximately 40Mins

Ok, this is ... My first attempt at commenting on this video was flagged as potentially inappropriate. Let’s try again. Of COURSE 99% of people have a hard time doing this! It’s because it’s on CZcams! People are lying in bed, getting ready to go to sleep, and they see a math problem. “It looks difficult - I don’t wanna be bothered. GinnyDi has an interesting new video, and EmilyWKing has a nice recycled classic, and Giulia Sirbu just released a new cover . . .” “But 99% find it difficult. That’s 99% of all people on the face of the earth. Only 1% can do it ...” FINE! I’ll give it a try! But what makes it difficult? It’s the fact that, as I said, we’re in bed watching videos, so we DON’T have access to paper, we DON’T have access to pens, we DON’T have access to pencils, and we have to do all the calculations in our HEADS! And we can’t even use the calculator on the iPad we’re using because there’s a percentage chance that when we switch from CZcams to anything, upon switching back, CZcams will be rebooted, and instead of getting back to where we left off, we’re going to be at a new screen of shorts, then we’ll be distracted by videos of Scottish army tactics of the 1700’s, alternate ways to build electromagnets, Gamazda’s Flight of the Bumble Bee, and the latest Star Trek song parody, and by the time we find our way back to the video, we won’t remember what we got off the calculator, so we have to just stay on the video, and do all the math in our heads. Now, getting the 680, that’s step 1, and probably the easiest part. Next, we have to figure out what we need to multiply 40 by to get to 680, and we have to multiply that by the 3 (not the 5) and keep that in memory with the 640 - er - I mean the 680, then we have to figure out what we have to multiply 85 by to get to 680, because even though we think we know, that screw up we just did with the 640 and the 680 has sown enough doubts that we need to double check our math and our memories, and we have to take that number and multiply it by the 5 (not the 3) and add that to the other number we’re trying to remember (the 680/40*3 number, to come up with the final result. Now, we don’t want to spend 15 to 20 minutes watching the entire video, we just want to double check our answer to make sure we got it right. So, we scan to the end, watching the mini-progress window for the answer, and WE CAN’T FIND IT! Oh, sure, LCD has been verified as 680, THAT’S NOT THE HARD PART! The HARD part is keeping all that junk in memory when figuring out rest of the equation, especially since we can’t go to the store for more than 4 items without a list! And here, the presenter is saying (at around the 12:53 mark) to multiply these numbers with a calculator or do it by hand - WE’RE IN BED WATCHING VIDEOS - WE DON’T HAVE ACCESS TO PENS OR PENCILS OR PAPERS OR CALCULATORS - WE’RE DOING ALL THIS IN OUR HEADS! Then the video doesn’t even have the decency to VERIFY THE ANSWER! If we went through the trouble to do the mental gymnastics to calculate and memorize the various components of the calculation to come up with the answer in our heads, the LEAST the video can do is VERIFY THE FINAL ANSWER! If you get this problem in math class, and all you show is the LCD, YOU’RE GONNA GET AN “INCOMPLETE”! TabletClass Math - I’ll probably try to make it a habit to avoid those videos in the future.

Pray for me yall I got an entrance exam today I'm scared as h

16😊

The answer is 16. That said, you mentioned not solving 16 X 16. I agree that it is not needed here. But for those of us who are old-school IBM mainframe programmers, we all know off the top of our heads that 16 squared is 256. Back in the day, when a mainframe program would puke, you would have to read a hexadecimal dump to understand what was going on when your program terminated. Thanks for the video.

What you are doing by teaching math wrongfully and misleading many students is beyond terrible, particularly given my many responses correcting your mistakes. Before yet again I provide 4 different points of proof your video is flat out wrong, I really hate having to share my background simply for others to recognize there is great credibility with my words. I took all of the required courses for a math PhD at Duke and Michigan State, and have an MA with a specialization in International Finance. I taught math at two universities and at one of the top private schools in the US, Cranbrook, for which the current tuition is $40,000 per year. However, it isn't only me who readily finds you to be wrong, but every math PhD I studied under and all of the Math PhD's who wrote the textbooks I studied and taught out of. We aren't wrong, you, Mr. CZcams are wrong, and I really urge you to stop teaching math wrongfully, as that is a great disservice. With the expression 16 divided by [(9-5) squared] x16.....very simple. What is the numerator? That is the value before the division sign, which is 16. What is the denominator......the rest of it, which is [(9-5)squared] x16. Here are the four points of proof that you are wrong. 1) You are assuming parenthesis that don't exist, as you are treating the expression of 16/ [(9-5) squared] x16, as [16/(9-5)squared] x16, which is not how the expression is written. Parenthesis or brackets cannot be assumed by definition of an implied multiplication operator 2) The denominator, [(9-5)squared]x16 is a product by definition. Which in this case is of two values, 9-5 squared, which is 4squared, which is 16 multiplied by 16. 16x16 is a product, and you are effectively stating that there can't be a product in the denominator without using parenthesis which is false. Take 1/3x1/4, that equals 1/12th. But you are saying no, we can't have 1/3x4 equaling 1/12th, unless parenthesis are assumed....of 1/(3x4), which is wrong. But that is what you do, as if I have you multiply 1/3x4, you will treat the expression as (1/3)x4, which is 4/3rds, and for which you can't assume parenthesis. 3) You violate the definition of the vinculum, which is the dividing line, which calls for grouping of values above the line and below the line. With this problem of 16/[9-5]squaredx16......what is above the line? 16 is the only value grouped above the line. What is below the dividing line, that is a product of [(9-5squared)]x16, as those values are grouped below the vinculum, and by definition are a product. But what you are doing is breaking up the grouping of the product beneath the vinculum, of removing 16 from the denominator, which violates the definition of the vinculum. 4) Lastly there is the simple algebraic proof, a/bc=a/bx1/c, and not how you do it, as (a/b)xc, for which again you are assuming parenthesis. Stop teaching pre-algebra wrongfully. You should review a video entitled PEMDAS is a lie, which cites of engineers and others who work with math for a living, for which our buildings and bridges would collapse if they worked with math as you do. Shame on you as I have posted several times trying to have you not teach people wrongfully, for which my academic and career background, and moreso, that of all of the math PhD's I studied under, and whose textbooks I studied and taught out of, exponentially exceeds yours.

17 minutes to explain this? Seems like a little to much for a simple problem like this, even considering taking into account explaining PEMDAS for those who find that confusing.

I m glad I'm not in your class.. I would be bored to death... so much side stuff

Yes I can, and I did!

Agreed

Omg wayyyyy too long

16

16

Greetings. The answer is 16, couple seconds.