Quote:
Originally Posted by d-null
I don't think his example is a correct answer at all, nowhere does it say to cross out the number of acorns in your dice roll "twice"
using his method, you could easily end up with a negative number, for example if you rolled a 6 while doing question A, and I really doubt that negative numbers are in grade 1 assignments
|
Sure, but with "new math" his answer "could" be correct.
Personally, I don't think it is right either.
Warchild's answer is spot on for me, this is what they are trying to do, dumb down the masses. Anything is possible, just print more money, bail everyone out, it "can" add up if you look at it from the "correct" perspective.
This is far from the math and economics that I was taught growing up. Did I take Statistics and theoretical classes later, sure, but they are taking it to a new dimension now.
It now comes down to a theory of "push it as far as they will let us".
http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8