Let me try that again , as all except one seem to have not commented,
and he but laterally (as is acceptable), as is his wont ... :-)

All answers that are not "9" are wrong !!!
People are welcome to disagree, but please address both the
commutative requirement below and slightly more general points raised
in my prior email.

See my prior post for the detailed reasons why.

Short version:

Reverse the order of the two indivisible* portions and compare with origina=
l.
Does anyone DISAGREE that the answer *SHOULD* be the same when we do as fol=
lows:
If anyone does disagree, please explain why.
Original                       =3D              Transposed version
A =3D 6 / 2 * (1 + 2)                          A =3D (1 + 2) * 6 / 2

Does any one NOT get "9" for the second version.?

Can you see WHY the first version does not =3D "9" if it doesn't.
It's because the scope of the "/" operator does not extend beyond the
following number (here =3D 2) whereas all solutions that obtain "1" as
an answer do not meet this requirement.

At core the requirement that "multiplication is commutative" must be met
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutative_property

A x B =3D =3D B x A

So:         expression 1   x    expression 2    =3D =3D   expression 2
x   expression 1

That is, expression 1 & 2 may be evaluated separately and THEN
multiplied together, or not, and the same result should be obtained.

So
   A      *  B
=3D 6/2   * (1+2)
=3D 3      * 3
=3D 9
No?


        Russell
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.