Forgiving Green Hills Zone

Forgiving Green Hills Zone 1.2

DOWNLOAD
Overview Updates (1) Reviews (4) History Discussion
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Markius

Markius

Member
MBH submitted a new resource:

Forgiving Green Hills Zone - A re-creation of Green Hills Zone, with a fun twist!

THIS MAP IS SONIC ONLY!!!!!!!!!!!!

View attachment 170262



Greetings. This is Forgiving Green Hills Zone, my first level (submitted to the MB). A re-creation of Green Hills Zone, from Sonic 1 (MASTER SYSTEM). However, there is a twist. It's a tiny bit harder than the original Green Hills. I hope you enjoy it. Here are more photos.


View attachment 170263View attachment 170264
Click to expand...

Read more about this resource...
 
GRAHHHHHHHHHHH THE P IN PEMDAS ONLY MEANS THAT THE OPERATIONS WITHIN PARENTHESIS MUST BE DONE FIRST IT DOES NOT MEAN YOU MULTIPLY IT OUT FIRST BECAUSE THAT TAKES PLACE OUTSIDE THE PARENTHESIS
 
Markius i cursed your family for the next 305 moons after playing this...
 
srb20016.png

Well, how MBH Asked me in my review about how i solve this thing with actual math that give me a result of 0.6 I will explain this.
Firts, how you can see, the ecuation is (2+1) 2/9. So, to start, we first do the addition of the parentheses (Although it is not really necessary and I will explain it later) and then the division.
Captura1.PNG

This The equation would be like this: (3) 0.22222
Now you will ask: "If we solved the operation inside parentheses, why is it still there?"
Well, We Solved the Operation but we haven't removed them yet. To do this, we must perform a multiplication, since otherwise we won't be able to solve the exercise. (This is because, as you can see, there's no sign next to the parentheses. Consequently, we can't add or subtract the factors, so in these cases, multiplication is usually the key.)
So, we multiply 3 by 0.2 (It is not necessary to put all the decimals) and this gives us 0.6
Captura2.PNG

And this rounding equals 1.
And this is our result. But there is another way to perform the operation that confirms the result is correct.
If instead of performing the operations in parentheses first, we divide 2/9 and then multiply the result (0.2) by the numbers inside the parentheses. We would get this sum: 0.4 +0.2

Captura3.PNG

And the result of that sum is the same result that the other method gave us: 0.6
Captura4.PNG

It´s Pretty simple.
 
MIlsam El Erizo said:
View attachment 172396
Well, how MBH Asked me in my review about how i solve this thing with actual math that give me a result of 0.6 I will explain this.
Firts, how you can see, the ecuation is (2+1) 2/9. So, to start, we first do the addition of the parentheses (Although it is not really necessary and I will explain it later) and then the division.View attachment 172397
This The equation would be like this: (3) 0.22222
Now you will ask: "If we solved the operation inside parentheses, why is it still there?"
Well, We Solved the Operation but we haven't removed them yet. To do this, we must perform a multiplication, since otherwise we won't be able to solve the exercise. (This is because, as you can see, there's no sign next to the parentheses. Consequently, we can't add or subtract the factors, so in these cases, multiplication is usually the key.)
So, we multiply 3 by 0.2 (It is not necessary to put all the decimals) and this gives us 0.6View attachment 172403
And this rounding equals 1.
And this is our result. But there is another way to perform the operation that confirms the result is correct.
If instead of performing the operations in parentheses first, we divide 2/9 and then multiply the result (0.2) by the numbers inside the parentheses. We would get this sum: 0.4 +0.2

View attachment 172405
And the result of that sum is the same result that the other method gave us: 0.6
View attachment 172406
It´s Pretty simple.
Click to expand...
Your.... looking at it the wrong way/ from the wrong side
 
MBH said:
Your.... looking at it the wrong way/ from the wrong side
Click to expand...
srb20018.png

Well, that looks like that is the case (This ecuation gives you 9)
But is pretty funny how if you look from the other side (Which is actually easier) it gave you the correct result.
srb20019.png

It seems that the shot backfired on you. XDD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Back
Top