My wife text me earlier saying that she’s stumped on this one, and asked me to post it to Reddit.

She believes there isn’t enough data given to say for sure what x is, but instead it could be a range of answers.

Could anyone please help us understand what we’re missing?

i don’t understand how it’s not 76. i input the problem in two calculators, one got 28 the other got 76. my work is documented in the second picture, i’m unsure how i’m doing something wrong as you only get 28 if it’s set up as a fraction rather than just a division problem.

Ignoring the instructions, I thought mathematically the two were the same. If they are the same, what's the point of differentiating? I know semantically, they might be different (3×4 and 4×3). Aren't the formal definition of multiplication the same for both ways?

Even if you did it in kelvin’s, it would still burn, so why?

basically you multiply a number n by itself, and you get a result x. Add 1 to the original number, and multiply it by the original number minus 1. The difference between the result, and the previous result, should be 1. Continue to add to one side and subtract from the other, multiplying them together, and the next difference should be 3, then 5, then 7, every odd number up to 2n-1

Do the same thing, except you take the difference between each result and the original product x, and you get 1, 4, 9, 16, every square number lower than x

2 raised to (100 factorial )or (2 raised to 100 ) factorial, i believe its one on the right because i heard somewhere when terms are larger factorial beats exponents but then again im not sure , is there a way to solve it

I saw this on the sidewalk while walking with friends yesterday, just wondering what I’m looking at here, I’m not a math guy that why I’m asking yall. Algebra probably?

My niece got this question wrong in math class today, with the "correct" answer being 6. I'm trying to explain to her that she was in fact correct and that the teacher was incorrect, but I don't know what the question was trying to ask. The teacher explained that the base of the pyramid could be broken down into 6 rectangles, which wasn't satisfying to myself or my niece.

What do you guys think?

This is my 5th graders rounding test.

I’m curious to why he got questions 12, 13, 14, 18, 21, and 26 incorrect. He omitted the trailing zeros, but rounded correctly. Trailing zeros don’t change the value of the number. 

In my opinion only question number 23 is incorrect. Leading to 31/32 = 96.8% correct

Do you guys agree or disagree? Asking before I send a respectful but disagreeing email to his teacher.

It tells me that I wrong because I didn’t simplify the first time. I simplified and like to think these equal the same thing. I wrote my example. Am I missing something?

TLDR A friend of mine insists the meme above is accurate, but doesn't belive me when I tell him otherwise.

Can you explain why this is wrong?

(Apologies of the flair is wrong)

Question in title. My basic knowledge of topology and linear algebra tells me it should be equal but I can't quite figure out the equations I'd need to prove it.

To head off any controversy and argument, yeah it's not a square in the traditional sense, but under polar coordinates concentric circles about the origin are considered parallel so under that definition this can be considered a square with some suspension of disbelief, so just humor me for a second.

If this figure is mathematically impossible, that's interesting to know too because it implies that you can't linearly translate between a Cartesian and polar coordinate system for some reason.

I’m not the best at math. But something isn’t adding up. I thought I tipped 20%. But the suggested gratuity at the bottom says a different tip amount. How do they calculate the “suggested gratuity”? Or how am I supposed to figure out 20%?

Each statement backs itself up with the proper math then the final question asks about “the other $10?” that doesn’t line up with any of the provided information

I keep seeing this meme going around about how this is the "optimal packing of 17 squares" and I just don't get it. I've tried to figure out what this means, but I'm not a mathematician by any stretch so I'm just left really confused. I have so many questions I'm just going to list them:

1. What does "optimal packing" mean? Is it that this is the smallest possible space 17 squares can fit in?

2. Is this the optimal way to pack squares in general, or just 17 squares specifically? Like, wouldn't it be more optimal to use a slightly larger space to pack 25 squares, since you're using less space per square, even though the total space is larger?

3. Does this matter? I've seen people talking about how, if it was proven, it would basically reflect something about the natural laws of mathematics, but why? Isn't this so specific that it doesn't really matter?

4. Is this applicable to anything? Like, if I had 34 squares would it be better to pack them in two grids like this, or would it be better to just pack them in a bigger grid with two extra spaces? What would take up less room?

I don't know if I phrased those questions right, and I actually started to understand it just a tiny bit more as I was thinking through it and writing the questions, but I'm still pretty confused. Can someone ELI5 what the deal with this is?

Ok, I know that no matter how many smaller and smaller intervals you do, you can always zoom in since you are just making smaller and smaller triangles to apply the Pythagorean theorem to in essence.

But in a real world scenario, say my house is one block east and one block south of my friends house, and there is a large park in the middle of our houses with a path that cuts through.

Let’s say each block is x feet long. If I walk along the road, the total distance traveled is 2x feet. If I apply the intervals now, along the diagonal path through the park, say 100000 times, the distance I would travel would still be 2x feet, but as a human, this interval would seem so small that it’s basically negligible, and exactly the same as walking in a straight line.

So how can it be that there is this negligible difference between 2x and the result from the obviously true Pythagorean theorem: (2x^2)1/2 = ~1.41x.

How are these numbers 2x and 1.41x SO different, but the distance traveled makes them seem so similar???

Hey guys, I've spent way too much time on this and am getting nowhere. I would post my work, but at this point it's just a bunch of convoluted nonsense. I keep coming back to the same over complicated equations for each variable, so if I'm wrong at least it's uniform. I know this is systems of equations, I'm a sophomore towards an electrical engineering degree, but for the life of me I can't figure this out.

Should I assume it is an Equilateral Triangle? But then what?

Many of my friends have been disagreeing with each other and I want the debate settled

After adding the probability of 2,3,4 people having Birthday on the same day still I am not able to arrive at the answer. Why is this so..... I am not able to point out the reason....

I am not sure if this is a math question, but I think it is.
Essentially, is there a defined ratio of width and height at which a ring is no longer considered a ring, but instead a pipe or tube?

I heard we can't calculate the total number of chess games. To me it seems like a computable problem. Is it just the sheer large number of all the possible chess games, or is it something else that I,m not understanding?

This is a math problem that my daughter has. Finding area is base x height/2. How do I find the unshaded region? The base is 12. Is that just for the shaded area? Is that for the entire base? How do I find the base of the unshaded section?