any other answer apart from 7 is wrong.

kaboninc:


At least I dey type simple and clear English.

nah ur android keyboard dey help u oh .....rather than facing the issue under discussed ur busy tell me the school am from...... my first term school fees fit feed u MacDonald's for a year oh

Weah96:


6-0+1=6+1-0=-0+1+6=1-0+6=-0+6+1. ALL EQUAL 7

You're keeping the negative, for some reason.

-0+1=+1

Add +1 to +6. There is no negative anywhere. You already used it with the -0+1=1.

That is the mistake you are making, Using the negative. Bodmas forbids using the negative except in the last step of the order of operation.
BODMAS say you solve regions with Brakest/parenthesis, followed by Exponents, then Division and then multiplication and then addition and then subtraction.
2/2 is the division. The next in line according to bodmas is the multipliction of 1x0.. The next in line is the Addition and then followed by using the negative lastly.
It is possible to to view -0+1 as -(0+1) which leaves us still with -1.
You are using a method that assings the negative to use in contradiction to Bodmas. It is a convolution to say -0+1 is the same as +0+1.
It still means the same that zero does not exist as any value negative or positive.
If zero cannot carry a negative or positive value in real application, then i have to be real and apply the Negative symbol in an applicable way whch is that the - symbol in -0+1= -(0+1).

I am going by three premises. Bodmas, the notion that - or + cannot apply to 0(zero) on the number line and that phrasing of -0+1 is more suitable as -(0+1) which also stays true to zero being unable to carry a negative or positive designation in any applied function. Maybe in theory of pure math, but simple equatins are best to be practical that zero is a neutral value that must be separated from any positive or negative designation.
I understand what you are saying and it is theoretically possible in the same way there is theory to show that irrational numbers can fit equations according to certain rules of use.
0 is one of those debated numbers between those who try to quantify or at least qualify it and those who resolve to letting it simply be nothing and devoid of any quality such as positive or negative or other wise.

Trust me, i respect your answer and i am experienced with the deeper nature of math ,and like any language, dialectics will always interfere to give diversification to form and function and cause friction to any standards, principles and formulas.
Even Bodmas is just a conceeded compromise to help make a feasible standard of operation in what is truly a wild and amorphous nature of Pure mathematics..

TRULY AMORPHOUS NATURE OF PURE MATHEMATICS.

for crying out loud where is the OP of this thread I guess he has diarrhoea(Jedi Jedi).

Raphael9:
nah ur android keyboard dey help u oh .....rather than facing the issue under discussed ur busy tell me the school am from...... my first term school fees fit feed u MacDonald's for a year oh

Hehehehe.

You can set your phone to help you nau. Even Chinco get the facility.

Am afraid to say that your school fees for first term was a waste...especially if you write like this and if your explanation of a simple arithmetic computation is anything to go buy!

Cheers bro!

No problem

It will be better to Bleep her so I can tap all does knowledge she's got in her brain

kaboninc:


All these for me?

Brilliant ruubbish! Give that gospel to the sheep! The goats have higher IQ!

Well, I think you got the wrong dude. You are forgiven because am in a very good mood. No one has stepped on my shoesss lately and that's why I won't respond to that non.sense you put up there!

Well, why don't you tell us your answer?

Am catching fun here because these guys want me to. And am not even laughing at the answers they provide even when they are wrong but the reasons for their answers or workings. Oh and their ignorance not to accept the correct answer. That's the part that cracks me up!

Wait, are you one of them? Or did I hit a nerve? Get a real life sir!

So please take your face-saving self to another world. I ain't gat time for bulllshhiittt!

While you're at it, shine ya eyes very well before you throw insults. Some guys are the monsters that monsters dread.

u re a proud olodo.

7

19naia:


[s]That is the mistake you are making, Using the negative. Bodmas forbids using the negative except in the last step of the order of operation.
BODMAS say you solve regions with Brakest/parenthesis, followed by Exponents, then Division and then multiplication and then addition and then subtraction.
2/2 is the division. The next in line according to bodmas is the multipliction of 1x0.. The next in line is the Addition and then followed by using the negative lastly.
It is possible to to view -0+1 as -(0+1) which leaves us still with -1.
You are using a method that assings the negative to use in contradiction to Bodmas. It is a convolution to say -0+1 is the same as +0+1.
It still means the same that zero does not exist as any value negative or positive.
If zero cannot carry a negative or positive value in real application, then i have to be real and apply the Negative symbol in an applicable way whch is that the - symbol in[/s] -0+1= -(0+1).

[s]I am going by three premises. Bodmas, the notion that - or + cannot apply to 0(zero) on the number line and that phrasing of -0+1 is more suitable as -(0+1) which also stays true to zero being unable to carry a negative or positive designation in any applied function. Maybe in theory of pure math, but simple equatins are best to be practical that zero is a neutral value that must be separated from any positive or negative designation.
I understand what you are saying and it is theoretically possible in the same way there is theory to show that irrational numbers can fit equations according to certain rules of use.
0 is one of those debated numbers between those who try to quantify or at least qualify it and those who resolve to letting it simply be nothing and devoid of any quality such as positive or negative or other wise.

Trust me, i respect your answer and i am experienced with the deeper nature of math ,and like any language, dialectics will always interfere to give diversification to form and function and cause friction to any standards, principles and formulas.
Even Bodmas is just a conceeded compromise to help make a feasible standard of operation in what is truly a wild and amorphous nature of Pure mathematics..

TRULY AMORPHOUS NATURE OF PURE MATHEMATICS.[/s]

I had to cancel all you wrote and left that part. I wanted to cancel all but decided against it.

See sir,

- 0 + 1 is not the same as -(0 + 1)

- 0 + 1 = + 1 - 0 = 1

While

-(0 + 1) = "-0" - 1 = -1

Thanks.

Donpizzle:

u re a proud olodo.

Chaii...e dey pain am ohh
Oya, go dey baale!

kaboninc:


Hehehehe.

You can set your phone to help you nau. Even Chinco get the facility.

Am afraid to say that your school fees for first term was a waste...especially if you write like this and if your explanation of a simple arithmetic computation is anything to go buy!

Cheers bro!

okay my brother I feel ya' thanks for the insult though, I thank God I had the money to waste oh! #liveandlet'slivebro

kaboninc:


I had to cancel all you wrote and left that part. I wanted to cancel all but decided against it.

See sir,

- 0 + 1 is not the same as -(0 + 1)

- 0 + 1 = + 1 - 0 = 1

While .




-(0 + 1) = "-0" - 1 = -1

Thanks.

You Are still contradicting Bodmas by using that negative symbol in the equation before using all positive symbol processes.
You are not going by strict rules of Bodmas and that is ok if you are independent minded and searching for new avenues through the Mathe.
Either you make an exception to the order of Bodmas or you can make the exception that -0+1 can be phrased as -(0+1) to keep in accordance with the rules of bodmas. Its all Abitrary and no approach should be crossed out for the sake of the evolution of mathematics.
I dont have examinations to pass and face the illusion that mathmatics form is not arbitrary as people are conditioned and trained to believe in schools..
Maybe its best you stick to your approach for what you are required by those who control your thinking.
I just want to explore the contradictions and arbitrary qualities in the nature if pure mathematics.

What you are failing to see, is the arbitrary nature of math and how dialectics apply. You can cross out what you like. I will retain the benefit of both your point of view and mine which are both as viable in various equations and the application of pure math.

19naia:



What you are failing to see, is the arbitrary nature of math and how dialectics apply. You can cross out what you like. I will retain the benefit of both your point of view and mine which are both as viable in various equations and the application of pure math.

This is not about pure or impure maths!

This is simple arithmetic. And anyhow u turn or twist it, - 0 + 1 is not the same as - (0 + 1).

Raphael9:
okay my brother I feel ya' thanks for the insult though, I thank God I had the money to waste oh! #liveandlet'slivebro

Me insult you? Lol.

No brother, I didn't.

You on the other hand said your first term school fees can buy me McDonald's for one whole year. Meaning am a poor fella who lives on gala or you're one rich kid with lots of money to be spent on you.

Yes, it was a mistake and a waste for a whole lot of money to be spent on you! Its the dam.n truth sir!

#liveandletslivesir!

kaboninc:


Me insult you? Lol.

No brother, I didn't.

You on the other hand said your first term school fees can buy me McDonald's for one whole year. Meaning am a poor fella who lives on gala or you're one rich kid with lots of money to be spent on you.

Yes, it was a mistake and a waste for a whole lot of money to be spent on you! Its the dam.n truth sir!

#liveandletslivesir!

av said nothing but the truth apologies for any derogatory statements made with all sense of humility sir!

19naia:


It is possible to to view -0+1 as -(0+1) which leaves us still with -1.

No it isn't. -0+1 should be written as -(0-1) not the way you wrote it. -(0+1) is -0-1 which is -1.

Maths was my least favorite subject, but I'm pretty sure about that one.

kaboninc:


This is not about pure or impure maths!

This is simple arithmetic. And anyhow u turn or twist it, - 0 + 1 is not the same as - (0 + 1).

Pure math is all of the above, simple and mind boggling, and the very nature of the "Mathe" is that it twist and turns in a malleable way just as any language twist and turns malleable into various dialects.
I speak yoruba and know of various dialects. Also in english various dialects.

Pure math invokes that Dialectics apply where you can phrase your arithmetic expression in arbitrary ways so as to fit various more complex models in Mathematics. Mathe is like a dialect, various ways of phrasing are possible and there is still a lot yet to be discovered and corrected in what is taught as proper Mathematics.

The crux of this equation is the use of zero which was not even allowed in original mathmatics until a few ceturies ago. The debate still unsues among top world mathmaticians about the application of zero in math and the problems it creates when assigning zero a quality and function despite it representing nothing at all.
Trust me, the "Mathe " is like a maze full of twists and turns and no truly straight forward path to any particular destination or answer.
Maybe one day you will explore Math philosphy and theory for its wild nature.
Even the debate over the application of bodmas was never resolved among all the experts who ushered it into standard form. They just settled on the form we inherited today, because it works well enough and would save them endless theory debate through the wild maze that math can carry people through when you really think about math rather than just following rules of operation set forth by people who really think about math and know its true arbitrary nature.

Trust me when i say i agree with your answer as much as i agree with mine. But i chose mine just to stick as close to bodmas as possible.
According to Bodmas 6-0+1= 6-(0+1).. that leaves 6-(+1). and like you said -(+1) = -1 .. Therfore 6-1 which is 5.
Think first bodmas then think about phrasing in the order that bodmas prescribes.

Now here is another trick to reach your answer in the same way i did reach my answer.
6-0+1 can be rearranged to be 6+1-0. then bodmas will also allow (6+1)-0. that equals 7. The answer is seven with just moving numbers around.
If i leave the equation in its original lay out, i get 5 resulting. If i rearrange it without corupting it, i get 7 resulting.
That zero makes a confusing difference and can help people discover the arbitrary nature of mathe in its pure form.

kaboninc:


Because of this:

abeg explain how u got ur 7

hollowpot15684:


5 is wrong because using BODMAS, u use multiplication first, followed by division, followed by addition and then subtraction..
If u use it this way u can never get 5..
If u still don't get 7 pls consult ur siblings.

LMAO u said addition before subtraction ryt? but u have done subtraction 1st.. dats y ur gettn 7.. ask ur younger ones abeg

kaboninc:


Chaii...e dey pain am ohh

Oya, go dey baale!

u b olodo for real ooo

miketayo:


LMAO u said addition before subtraction ryt? but u have done subtraction 1st.. dats y ur gettn 7.. ask ur younger ones abeg

You are right here boss, but seven is also possible answer. It is a dialectic issue created here by the way they apply zero and giving it the - symbol. Zero must be nothing with no positive or negative and no value. It must remain neutral and useless.
But they did violate Bodmas by using the negative on the zero before all other +,x or division.

But look. when they reach 6-0+1, Bodmas allows them to do this. Rephrase as such 6+1-0. then from there, they can phrase as (6+1)-0 and the answer is correctly 7.
The same goes according to bodmas if we do not rephrase it before separating the regions. 6-0+1. therefore bodmas requires we isolate and solve the addition regions first. so 6-(0+1)= 6-(+1)= 6-1= 5.
Without bodmas in the way, the result is clearly 7. ? But there is a bodmas way to reach 7 as i showed above.
The equation is particular to bring out the contradictions of bodmas.
The answer is 5 but it is also 7 and in simple applied method for basic correctness, the correct answer is 7.
The guy is right but he needs to be open minded to understand more about mathe rather than just commited to what he knows even though he is right, There is more to it than just being right. There is understanding to be had because math is quite an amazing maze.

Using bodmas division first u get 1. Then multiplication u get 0. Addition next it will now be 0+1=1 Subtraction follows 6-1=5.

They said answer IT, the answer is IT na, na wao, dis na primary skul jokes na.... una dey even use calculator nd google, smh!

kaboninc:


I don Chi Chom Chim!!!!!!





Na which Community Secondary School you go?

You den call person "Ode"......

Simple bodmAS...A-add, then S-subtract....

lekkie073:
6-1×0+2÷2


Bodmas

No b racket
No o ff

There is d ivision
I.e. 6-1×0+1

There is m ultiplication
I.e 6-0+1

There is a addition
I.e 6+1

Its 7

6-1×0+2÷2

Rule of bodmas......
No bracket in the equation

No of

Solve the division next
Gives u 6-1+0×…………………2÷2=1
......6-1×0+1


Solve multiplication next
Gives u 6-........1×0=0.......+1
.......6-0+1


Solve addit ion next
Gives u 6- ....0+1=1
........6-+1

-+ says u should add and subtract 1 at the same time.....
6-0+1=7.......

Addition and subtraction does not have a definite order in the rule of Bodmas

Now the answer is 7

MrOlai:

6-1x0+2÷2
STEP 1: (2÷2) = 1
STEP 2: (1x0) = 0
STEP 3: (6+1) = 7
STEP 4: (7-0) = 7
Final answer = 7 (QED)

akandea:
7

donpapachi:
Using bodmas division first u get 1.
Then multiplication u get 0.
Addition next it will now be 0+1=1
Subtraction follows 6-1=5.

Using PEMDAS
Perenthesis
Multiplication
Division
Addition
Subtraction you follow this pattern

So, 6-1x0+2/2
You start with multiplication as you can see subtraction is the last
so, 1x0 = 0, 6-0+2/2
Next is Division so divide 2/2

You are left with 6-0+1

AND YOU ALREADY KNOW 6-0+1 WILL BE 7

Tonylyte:
Solve the maths below and show your working.

4

7

1

HyDef:
Using BODMAS you'll get 7.

6 - 1 x 0 + 2 / 2

Division first.

2 / 2 = 1.

6 - 1 x 0 + 1

Multiplication next.

1 x 0 = 0.

6 - 0 + 1 = 7.

The answer, my friends, is 7.

Modified: Please... I don't know how to some people, -0 + 1 = - 1? It doesn't.

Added a picture. Google added the rules of BODMAS before solving it... Some people are solving the equation in the order it was presented... Truly 99% get it wrong. :/

Using BODMAS you'll get 7.

6 - 1 x 0 + 2 / 2

Division first.

2 / 2 = 1.

6 - 1 x 0 + 1

Multiplication next.

1 x 0 = 0.

6 - 0 + 1 = USING BODMAS then, 0+1=1 therefore, 6-1=5

6-1*0+2/2
Soln
Using bodmas
6-1*0+1
6+0+1
7
Equal to 7