Current Events > Simplify y = 6x/6x

(+) Yeah! (+)

and what is the domain of y?

1

y e {1}

x e R
---

isnt it 1?

I hate deliberately obtuse problems like this but I love how unanimous the poll is.

Domain: x E R - {0}
Range: y E {1}
---

y = 6x/6x
6 * x / 6 * x
6x / 6 * x
x * x
x^2

---

gopher

question: how come everyone put 1 here, but 4 in the other topic?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/79413364

Fam_Fam posted...

question: how come everyone put 1 here, but 4 in the other topic?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/79413364

x doesnt have a value

---

Nukazie posted...

x doesnt have a value

This. 6*x = 6x. Its pretty simple

---

DepreceV2 posted...

This. 6*x = 6x. Its pretty simple

and 6*2 = 12

Fam_Fam posted...

question: how come everyone put 1 here, but 4 in the other topic?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/79413364

Because in algebra, coefficient and variable is seen as a unit.

---

Fam_Fam posted...

and 6*2 = 12

And 12/6 = 2

If you want your outcome, you must add parentheses to both sets of multiplication to indicate that those must be done first. If not, you get 4

---

Squall28 posted...

Because in algebra, coefficient and variable is seen as a unit.

there's implied parentheses/grouping around multiplication when a variable is involved, but not for constants?

Fam_Fam posted...

there's implied parentheses/grouping around multiplication when a variable is involved, but not for constants?

Yes.

---

DepreceV2 posted...

Yes.

can you show a source that documents this property?

Are you making a point for the importance of parenthesis? I get what you're saying, if you answered 4 in the other topic your answer here should be x^2. That is probably not the intended answer, but without parenthesis it is very unclear. Following PEMDAS you would resolve the multiplication before the division, so the answer is 1. Again, could be much more understandable with parenthesis.

Solid_Seb posted...

Are you making a point for the importance of parenthesis? I get what you're saying, if you answered 4 in the other topic your answer here should be x^2. That is probably not the intended answer, but without parenthesis it is very unclear. Following PEMDAS you would resolve the multiplication before the division, so the answer is 1. Again, could be much more understandable with parenthesis.

There is a reason why people dont write trash equations like that. As for me proving Im right with a source? I cant give you a source. I can explain it but thats it. I cant find a source on it.

This is a waste of time anyway because people dont write equations like that because it is confusing.

---

TC, i get that youre bad at understanding math

if you wrote 6 x / 6 x then the answer would be x^2

parentheses are absolutely implied around coefficients stuck to variables, because 6x is one number, one item

---

Also if you had meant

6 *x*(1/6)*x, you should write the constants together.

6*(1/6)*x*x

---

DepreceV2 posted...

Yes.

There's not but if you were writing this equation on paper it would look more like this.



---

Bananana posted...

TC, i get that youre bad at understanding math

if you wrote 6 x / 6 x then the answer would be x^2

parentheses are absolutely implied around coefficients stuck to variables, because 6x is one number, one item

can you show me a source that says that grouping symbols are implied when using multiplication with variables?

Fam_Fam posted...

DepreceV2 posted...

Yes.

can you show a source that documents this property?

The simple fact that you can write 6x without a operator between 6 and x proves it

No-one would assume 62 would be twelve and not sixty-two
---

teep_ posted...

The simple fact that you can write 6x without a operator between 6 and x proves it

No-one would assume 62 would be twelve and not sixty-two

well no shit 62 =/= 6*2. What I'm asking about is why you are saying that 6x = (6*x), and not simply 6*x without the additional grouping symbol around the outside. where is that part documented?

Fam_Fam posted...

can you show me a source that says that grouping symbols are implied when using multiplication with variables?

Sure, I can.... heres what you do

go to your fucking math class instead of skipping to shitpost on gamefaqs

man, the amount of times i see these dumbass questions with improperly written equations and expressions just to be annoying on here is shocking... are these really that fun to read?

Hadenough posted...

Sure, I can.... heres what you do

go to your fucking math class instead of skipping to shitpost on gamefaqs

man, the amount of times i see these dumbass questions with improperly written equations and expressions just to be annoying on here is shocking... are these really that fun to read?

and yet, I bet you cannot provide a single source that states the a grouping symbol is implied around cx = c*x, where c is a constant coefficient. In other words, where is ANY source that says cx = (c*x)?

Fam_Fam posted...

teep_ posted...

The simple fact that you can write 6x without a operator between 6 and x proves it

No-one would assume 62 would be twelve and not sixty-two

well no shit 62 =/= 6*2. What I'm asking about is why you are saying that 6x = (6*x), and not simply 6*x without the additional grouping symbol around the outside. where is that part documented?

The fraction line also acts as a grouping symbol. Everything above the line in the numerator is grouped together, and everything below the line in the denominator is grouped together.

https://www.dummies.com/education/math/algebra/grouping-symbols-in-algebra/

6x/6x = (6x)/(6x) =/= 6 * (x/6) * x
---

teep_ posted...

https://www.dummies.com/education/math/algebra/grouping-symbols-in-algebra/

6x/6x = (6x)/(6x) =/= 6 * (x/6) * x

I did not use the fraction line that your description follows:

Fraction Line (Vinculum)

You used the HTML (or whatever) equivalent
---

teep_ posted...

You used the HTML (or whatever) equivalent

so you'd argue that

48/3+5 is 6?

Fam_Fam posted...

teep_ posted...

You used the HTML (or whatever) equivalent

so you'd argue that

48/3+5 is 6?

There's a + between 3 and 5 and no operator between 6 and x. Try again

e: oh, and maybe @Eevee-Trainer will have that source your life seems to depend upon
---

Why are you so desperate to get the answer to an improperly written equation?

---

teep_ posted...

There's a + between 3 and 5 and no operator between 6 and x. Try again

e: oh, and maybe @Eevee-Trainer will have that source your life seems to depend upon

From your source:
everything below the line in the denominator is grouped together.

no exceptions for operators

Fam_Fam posted...

and yet, I bet you cannot provide a single source that states the a grouping symbol is implied around cx = c*x, where c is a constant coefficient. In other words, where is ANY source that says cx = (c*x)?

I did... its called math class

Your asking for a specific source to justify a nonsense claim. Im not doing your homework for you, go to extra help at lunch if you didnt understand the days lesson...
Fam_Fam posted...

I did not use the fraction line that your description follows:

Fraction Line (Vinculum)

come on guy....

Hadenough posted...

I did... its called math class

Your asking for a specific source to justify a nonsense claim. Im not doing your homework for you, go to extra help at lunch if you didnt understand the days lesson...

come on guy....

I used a / symbol, not a fraction bar

Why do you care so much? You havent answered that yet

---

DepreceV2 posted...

Why do you care so much? You havent answered that yet

Think he's trying to gotcha people, but all he's proving is he didn't do well in algebra. People good at math don't obsess over order of operations

---

(6x/6x) is the loneliest number.

---

Fam_Fam posted...

I used a / symbol, not a fraction bar

So how would one use a fraction bar in HTML (or whatever this site is built in)?
---

Hadenough posted...

I did... its called math class

Your asking for a specific source to justify a nonsense claim. Im not doing your homework for you, go to extra help at lunch if you didnt understand the days lesson...

come on guy....

"math class" is not a source. things are taught incorrectly all the time. and "class" is not an authority for any type of knowledge.

The x's would cancel each other out, leaving 6/6 = 1, right?

This isn't even one of the equations thats written badly so it can have multiple answers. I don't really understand what the argument here is.

my boy The Count knows the answer:

Written this way, it is deliberately vague and ends up being more of a trick question than a math question.
6x
6x
is obviously 1 (so long as x isn't 0)

6x/6x is open to interpretation whether it's like the above or "linear". My personal answer would be x^2 since I don't care for implications in maths. Either write it in a fancier way or add the parentheses.

Assuming it's (6x)/(6x), it can be simplified to x/x and the domain is D=R - {0}

---