Whatever level this question was posed at, the author should be fired for incompetence.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the question is in an exam for primary grade, then the answer is 6. However the question is badly worded for that level.
If the question is in a general test of IQ, the answer is 3.
Why would you divide by the reciprocal? Divide 2 by 3 and you get .666(and so on).Hi
How many thirds are in 2? 6 or 3?
Divide 2 by 1/3 you get 6.
There is always 3 thirds of any quantity so the answer is 3.
which is the correct answer?
Thank you
So you have proved my point.There are no thirds in zero because zero aint something, its nothing.
Of course it's a number.A third is not a number.
I made no generalized statement concerning numbers.So you have proved my point.
The number of thirds in a number depends upon the number.
I rephrased your statement but you did indeed offer two solutions to the question, depending upon the number.I made no generalized statement concerning numbers.
I specifically discussed things, as in something and nothing
You offered the solution zero for the number of thirds in zero.There are no thirds in zero because zero ain’t something, it’s nothing.
By anything it is reasonable to assume any number other than zero, since the original question was about numbers.There are always three thirds in anything.
I'll disagree with that!A third is not a number.
...
Non-native, as most of you know already, I consider this question a bad way of cheating. While I do not like answering questions with questions, this deserves: "thirds of what?"Hi
How many thirds are in 2? 6 or 3?
by Jake Hertz
by Robert Keim
by Jake Hertz
by Jeff Child