- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 4th grade question has us stumped!
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:30 pm to Bloodworth
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:30 pm to Bloodworth
quote:
My 7th grade daughter wants to know how you come by the 4 in the 10,000s place?
Next number in the series is 4.5. (If decimals/fractions haven't yet been taught by fourth grade--I can't remember--then there's a flaw in the question). The "next" number is the 4. Nothing says that the number in the sequence had to be a whole number or that it had to be rounded. The question is just asking for the next number.
1
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:30 pm to Rouge
Sorry, I had to find the book.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:30 pm to GRTiger
quote:
52,781
2 is also a prime number so it could be 52,782
ETA or 42782, or 42781... who the hell knows that is a stupid question
This post was edited on 9/25/14 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:31 pm to Pintail
No dummy, it's definitely 2. 1 isn't a prime number.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:31 pm to Bloodworth
quote:
Does this make sense to anyone?
Not at all
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:32 pm to GRTiger
quote:
I like 4 as the first number because the sequence should yield 4.5, and 4 is literally the next number in the sequence. But I've been pretty damn wrong this whole thread.
To everyone that responded in this thread... I will find out what the teacher provides as the answer tomorrow and resurrect this thread with her response.
Then I will strangle her.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:32 pm to Bloodworth
Get pics too
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:33 pm to tigerjjs
Back in my day - 1 was a prime number.
Prime Number
I have a headache now.
quote:
The number 1 is a special case which is considered neither prime nor composite (Wells 1986, p. 31). Although the number 1 used to be considered a prime (Goldbach 1742; Lehmer 1909, 1914; Hardy and Wright 1979, p. 11; Gardner 1984, pp. 86-87; Sloane and Plouffe 1995, p. 33; Hardy 1999, p. 46), it requires special treatment in so many definitions and applications involving primes greater than or equal to 2 that it is usually placed into a class of its own.
Prime Number
I have a headache now.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:34 pm to GRTiger
quote:
Get pics too
I wont share this response with the family! Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:36 pm to Bloodworth
Please give my OCD a break, and tell me y'all are using 46782 as the final answer.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:38 pm to LSUTigerDoc
My first reaction was to find a pattern out of the series that would give me something other than 4.5. I couldn't do it. Then comes the confusion.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:45 pm to Peazey
66782
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:48 pm to buford4LSU
quote:
66782
I agree after reading thought process in thread.
Since 1 is no longer "prime"!
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:48 pm to Bloodworth
The first number is 3.
3 * 12 = 36
3 * 6 = 18
3 * 3 = 9
3 * 1 = 3
The numbers multiplied by 3 are multiplying by 2. Pattern.
3 * 12 = 36
3 * 6 = 18
3 * 3 = 9
3 * 1 = 3
The numbers multiplied by 3 are multiplying by 2. Pattern.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:51 pm to Bloodworth
There's probably an instruction at the very beginning of the work-set stating to round up and use whole numbers.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:51 pm to Mr B
56,762 is the answer
5--4.5 rounds up to 5
6--8 is greatest factor--so 8-2=6
7--obvious--7x7=49
6--4th multiple of 2 is 6 not 8 (0,2,4,6)
2--1 is not a prime number and 2 is
5--4.5 rounds up to 5
6--8 is greatest factor--so 8-2=6
7--obvious--7x7=49
6--4th multiple of 2 is 6 not 8 (0,2,4,6)
2--1 is not a prime number and 2 is
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:52 pm to Mr B
That's dumb. It can be literally any combo if you do it that way.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:53 pm to Mr B
quote:
The numbers multiplied by 3 are multiplying by 2. Pattern.
If you followed your own strangely derived pattern, you'd get 4.5 like the rest of us.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:54 pm to Mr B
quote:
Mr B
No.
Posted on 9/25/14 at 9:55 pm to buford4LSU
According to my 7th grade daughter ... well...I'll let her explain why she thinks the answer is 6.
I think the number in the ten thousands place should be 6. The pattern's first number is 36, so the numbers following decrease, because you cannot go beyond 36. 36 divided by 2 is 18. 36 divided by 4 is 9. 36 divided by 6 is 6. 36 divided by 8 is 4.5, etc. The pattern is a dividing pattern, and you multiply the original divisor by 2 each time you continue the pattern. Because the number you are finding is third after 36, you divide 36 by 6, because you multiply the original divisor (2) by 3 and divide that by 36.
I think the number in the ten thousands place should be 6. The pattern's first number is 36, so the numbers following decrease, because you cannot go beyond 36. 36 divided by 2 is 18. 36 divided by 4 is 9. 36 divided by 6 is 6. 36 divided by 8 is 4.5, etc. The pattern is a dividing pattern, and you multiply the original divisor by 2 each time you continue the pattern. Because the number you are finding is third after 36, you divide 36 by 6, because you multiply the original divisor (2) by 3 and divide that by 36.
Page 5 of 12
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News