We all love a good brain teaser, especially when it involves math—whether we admit it or not. A tricky math problem recently went viral, leaving the internet divided and proving once again that even simple-looking equations can be deceptive.
My Math Struggles & A Challenge
Here’s a quick personal anecdote: I recently started preparing for the GRE and realized that I hadn’t taken a formal math class in nearly nine years. Confidence? Gone. My quantitative reasoning skills? Rusty at best. So, I decided to brush up by taking online high school math courses, starting from the absolute basics.
When I came across this viral math puzzle that was stumping the internet, I thought, “This is my moment! Let’s see if I still have my 9th-grade math chops!” Spoiler: I did not.
The Viral Math Puzzle Taking the Internet by Storm
The problem originally surfaced in Japan, where researchers found that only 60% of people in their 20s managed to solve it correctly. It quickly spread online, turning into yet another viral challenge because, apparently, we love testing our brains with tricky equations (or we just enjoy arguing over the answers).
At first glance, the problem looks simple. But the devil is in the details. My gut told me there was some sort of trick involved—it seemed too easy. However, instead of embarrassing myself by attempting it publicly, I turned to the internet for guidance. If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that someone, somewhere, has already tackled your problem and made an instructional video about it. So, I spent my morning watching people do math on YouTube. Exciting stuff.
The Math Problem:
6 ÷ 2(1 + 2) = ?
Go ahead, solve it. I’ll wait.
Video : Viral problem from Japan
Common Wrong Answers
If you got 1 or 9, you’re not alone. Many people arrived at these answers because of a little acronym called PEMDAS (Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction).
You may remember PEMDAS from school—or perhaps the mnemonic “Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally.” The rule dictates that you must solve problems in this specific order:
- Parentheses
- Exponents
- Multiplication & Division (from left to right)
- Addition & Subtraction (from left to right)
So, following PEMDAS, some people calculated it as:
- Solve inside the parentheses: (1 + 2) = 3
- Rewrite the problem: 6 ÷ 2(3)
- Some then treated 2(3) as a single term and multiplied first: 6 ÷ 6 = 1
However, others applied division before multiplication:
- 6 ÷ 2 = 3
- Then, 3 × 3 = 9
Both groups were confident in their logic, but only one approach was correct.
The Correct Answer
The correct answer is 9. Here’s why:
Step 1: Solve the Parentheses First
(1 + 2) = 3
Now the equation is rewritten as:
6 ÷ 2(3)
Step 2: Follow the Order of Operations
According to PEMDAS, division and multiplication are performed from left to right (since they share the same level of priority in the hierarchy).
- 6 ÷ 2 = 3
- 3 × 3 = 9
Wait… Isn’t the Answer 1?
Some people argue that implicit multiplication (like 2(3)) takes precedence over division. However, modern mathematical notation treats multiplication and division equally. Since they appear side by side in the equation, we solve left to right.
If the equation had been written as:
6 ÷ (2 × 3)
Then, you would multiply first and get:
6 ÷ 6 = 1
But because the given equation lacks parentheses around 2(3), the correct answer remains 9.
Why People Get It Wrong
The confusion stems from different ways of interpreting notation and how we were taught order of operations. In some older textbooks, implicit multiplication (like 2(3)) was given higher priority than division, leading to the alternative answer of 1. However, under modern mathematical conventions, division and multiplication hold equal weight and should be solved left to right.
Video : 13 Riddles That Are Trickier Than They Seem
Math Rules Are Not Always Universal
Believe it or not, different countries and academic institutions teach math slightly differently. Some older math textbooks might suggest treating multiplication next to parentheses as having higher priority, while others follow the standard left-to-right rule. This is why debates like this never really die down—people were simply taught different methods!
How to Avoid Future Math Confusion
- Always follow the standard order of operations – PEMDAS (or BODMAS, if you learned it that way).
- If in doubt, add brackets – Parentheses make everything clearer and help prevent confusion.
- Be consistent – If you’re solving problems with others, use the same approach so that everyone gets the same answer.
- Check multiple sources – Sometimes, even textbooks disagree. Looking at different explanations can help clarify tricky concepts.
Final Thoughts
This viral math problem is a perfect example of how simple-looking equations can spark endless debate. The way you approach it depends on how you learned math, but if you apply PEMDAS correctly, the answer is 9—at least according to current conventions.
So, did you get it right, or are you questioning everything you thought you knew about math? Either way, at least we can all agree that math is a lot trickier than it looks!
Jim Caviezel Makes a Protest and Says It Would Be “Awful and Ungodly” to Work with Robert De Niro
Actor Jim Caviezel rose to fame after calling renowned actor Robert De Niro a “awful, ungodly man” and refusing to work with him. This unusual attitude in Hollywood has generated conversations about how to balance one’s personal values with one’s commercial ties.
This article explores the specifics of Caviezel’s bold decision, the reasons he declined to collaborate with De Niro, and the broader effects of his open comments in the film industry. Jim Caviezel is well known for his steadfast moral principles and firm Christian convictions. His portrayal of Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” is what made him most famous.
On the other hand, the well-known actor Robert De Niro is commended for his versatility in acting and his candid opinions on a broad spectrum of social and political issues. Caviezel’s reluctance to collaborate with De Niro brings to light the conflict between a person’s moral convictions and the teamwork required in filmmaking.
In a recent interview, Caviezel was questioned on potential collaborations with De Niro. With considerable conviction, he declared, “I won’t work with Robert De Niro.” He is a terrible, immoral person.
The strong language in his message immediately caught the interest of fans and the media, generating questions about the specifics of the alleged falling out between the two celebrities. Throughout the meeting, Caviezel stayed silent on specifics, but it’s obvious that his decision was influenced by a deep moral battle.
Given De Niro’s ardent Christian beliefs and commitment to businesses that uphold his moral values, Caviezel appears to believe that there is a distinction between the man on the outside and his past actions.
Due to Caviezel’s ambiguous comment, there were speculations and a rise in public interest in the underlying dynamics. Entertainers often share their opinions on a variety of subjects, such as why they have chosen not to collaborate with a certain individual.
However, opinions on Caviezel’s bold statement have been mixed. Some commend him for sticking to his convictions, considering it an exceptional example of integrity in a field that is occasionally chastised for its lack of morality. Publicly making such statements, according to others, is a bad idea because it can limit one’s prospects for a future career and perpetuate divisions within the profession.
The fact that Caviezel turned down working with De Niro begs further concerns about how actors navigate their personal beliefs in the sometimes contentious, cooperative environment of Hollywood. Although many perspectives and expressions have historically benefited the industry, there is an increasing tendency of artists placing restrictions on their work according to their personal convictions.
This episode serves as an example of how Hollywood is evolving and how people are willing to uphold their principles even at the expense of their professional opportunities. In the entertainment industry, there have been cases where an actor’s public comments have benefited or hindered their career. Some who share Caviezel’s unwavering commitment to his beliefs may find it poignant that he turned down the opportunity to work with De Niro.
Leave a Reply