I've always hated semantic puzzles like this. Post more puzzles that make you boil on the inside
If you can solve this you are a genius
Connor Clark
Other urls found in this thread:
en.cppreference.com
twitter.com
Ethan Hughes
the answer is 120
Camden Baker
Well it's also 5!
Jace Jackson
Wow, I probably won't believe it!
Ian Perez
Factorials faggot
Justin Green
No, the answer is 5!.
Jesus learn how punctuation works.
Parker James
And that's why the image is wrong.
Caleb Bailey
The image isn't wrong, 5.0 is the same exact thing as 5. and the same exact thing as 5. the 0 has no value. It is to simplify the problem
Eli Collins
What.
Sentences end with punctuation that denotes the end of the sentence. This is true whether it ends in a number or not.
If that exclamation mark is supposed to denote factorial then it should have a full stop after it. Because it doesn't that means it is an exclamation mark, not a factorial indicator.
Benjamin Gutierrez
...
Brandon Mitchell
Even if the . in 0.5 is meant to be the end of the sentence, that would not make the answer 5. The only possible correct answers are 120 or 230.
$5 on this being a common core question.
Henry Ward
Are you a brainlet? 5 factorial is 120
It's supposed to be a joke
Sebastian King
If that's supposed to be a joke, I guess we can't call germans the most unfunny anymore.
Owen Williams
it's even ambiguous. just use fucking BIDMAS to get 120.
Joshua Ross
Which can be written as 5!, or 5 factorial. This problem is a perfect example of why I hate problembait whenever it's posted on here, it's written to be vague and confusing just so it can bait you into accidentally giving a half thought out answer, then labeling you as a brainlet for not immediately catching onto it's bullshit
Lincoln Lopez
5 factorial?
Lincoln Barnes
>being this triggered
Lol, its okay. I didn't get it at first either.
Sebastian Williams
Actually if you don't get it the first time means you're not a brainlet, since you can filter out the irrelevant information and actually focus on the problem at hand.
If you catch it on the first try you either do a lot of these so you're prepared for gotchas or your brain is wired sudoku-level and you always look for the shallowest answer
Hunter Ross
...
Ethan Jackson
>*Last clap*
Nathan Perry
Like posting a general image disproves the post in any way. And next time rename it so we don't see you screencapped it 6 hours before posting newfriend
Dominic Brown
Christian Smith
If you think it's an order of operations issue you didn't get it.
Benjamin Perry
Not the previous guy but I never even noticed that it was a double joke and if you switch the order of operations the result is 5
Hunter Harris
That's the trap. If you think it's saying the answer's 5 and it did order of operations differently than normal then you fell for the trap and didn't get the factorial joke.
Jordan Hughes
Yeah that ambiguity is precisely why the "joke" works
The purpose is to trigger a first round of besserwissers about precedence, and a second round of meta-besserwissers about factorial making it technicallycorrect.swf
Hudson Kelly
No, I got it at first despite being a math brainlet because I have come across similar things before.
It doesn't excuse you for being an English brainlet.
Landon Morris
>no right side of the equation, so it must be nothing
>230 - 220x0.5 = 0
>230 - 110x = 0
>230 = 110x
x = 2.090909...
Aaron Scott
Let me just plug that into the original equation
>230 - 2202.090909...0.5 = 0
Isaac Gray
My favorite is subtle variations on the Monty Hall Problem that change the probabilities and knowledge in meaningful ways.
Isaac Edwards
Medic!
Levi Williams
That was funny and clever, gg