This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Topics - Waiting for Those Letters
« on: November 21, 2007, 04:18:20 PM »
When the rate of inflation exceeds the rate of return on the most profitable investment available, the difference between these two rates will be the percentage by which, at a minimum, the value of any investment will decline. If in such a circumstance the value of a particular investment declines by more than a percentage, it must be true thatt__________.
Which of the following logically completes the argument?
a. the rate of inflation has risen
b. the investment in question is becoming less profitable
c. the investment in question is less profitable than the most profitable investment available.
d. the rate of return on the most profitable investment available had declined
e. there has been a change in which particular investment happens to be the most profitable available
If you can explain what the stimlus is saying that would be of great help.
« on: November 21, 2007, 04:01:37 PM »
Can you explain this one?
The Gulches is an area of volcanic rock that is gashed by many channels that lead downhill from the site of a prehistoric glacier to ariver. The channels clearly were cut by running water. It was once accepted as fact that the cutting occured gradually, as the glacier melted. But one geologist theorized that the channels were cut in a short time by an enormous flood. The channels do show phyisical evidence of having been formed quickly, but the flood theory was orginally rejected b/c scientists knew of no natural process that could melt so much so quickly. Paradoxically, today the scientific community accepts the flood theory even though scientists still do not know of a process that can melt so much ice so quickly.
Which one most resolves the paradox in the passage???
( I got to the correct by process of elimination but do not understand how it resolves the paradox):
d. scientists now believe that the prehistoric glacier dammed a scource of water, created a huge lake in the process, and then retreated.
« on: November 20, 2007, 10:22:31 PM »
I usually get this question type right. But, I guess there's a first ( and hopefully a last) for everything...
Of every 100 burglar alarms police answer, 99 are false alarms. This situation causes an enormous and dangerous drain on increasingly scarce public resources. Each false alarm wastes an average of 45 minutes of police time. As a result police are consistently taken away from responding to other legitimate calls for service, and a disproportionate share of police services goes to alarm system users, who are mostly business and affluent homeowners. However, burglar alarm systems, unlike car alarm systems, are effective in deterring burglaries, so the only acceptable solutiion is to fine burglar alarm system owners the cost of 45 minutes of police time for each false alarm their systems generate.
The statement that burglar alarm systems, unlike car alarm systems, are effective in deterring burglaries play which one of the following roles in the argument?
I was able to narrow it down to two answer choices:
a: it justifies placing more restrictions on owners of burglar alarms than on owners of car alarms
c: (CORRECT ANSWER) it provides a basis for excluding as unacceptable one obvious alternative to the proposal of filing owners of burglar alarm systems for false alarms.
« on: November 20, 2007, 01:26:00 PM »
Can you explain this one to me? I was only able to narrow it down to three.
A large group of hyperactive children whose regular diets included food containing large amounts of additives was observed by researchers train to assess the presence or absence of behavior problems. The children were then placed on a low-additive diet for several weeks, after which they were observed again. Orginally nearly 60% of the children exhibited behavior problems; after the change of diet, only 30% did so. On the basis of these data, it can be concluded that food additives can contribute to behavior problems in hyperactive children.
The evidence cited fails to establish the conclusion because:
(a) there is no evidence that the reduction in behavior problems was proportionate to the reduction in food- additive intake
(b) there is no way to know what changes would have occured w/o change of diet, since only children who changed to a low-additive diet were studies- This is the correct answer. Is this saying that the flaw with this experiment was that there was no control group???
(d) there is no evidence that the behavior of some of the children was unaffected by additives
« on: November 19, 2007, 03:54:01 PM »
PT 27 Section 3 Questions 7-12:
I did this game without much deductions. Was that the wrong approach for this type of game??? The only deductions I thought of were that there had to be at least 2 female snakes and at least one female lizard.
A zoo's repitle house has a straight row of excatly five consecutive habitats- numbered 1 through 5 from left to right- for housing exactly seven reptiles- four snakes and three lizards. Five of the reptiles are females and two are male. The reptiles must be house at follows.
No habitat houses more than two reptiles.
No habitat houses both a snake and a lizard.
No female snake is housed in a habitat that is immediately next to a hibtat housing a male lizard.
« on: November 15, 2007, 09:52:51 PM »
I could not answer questions #13, 14 and 18. I think I am missing some deductions here.
For number 13, the question make it seem that the answers needs to have the complete list of people in the given sport.
« on: November 15, 2007, 01:33:04 PM »
I have a million watches, but none where I can actually look at in one second to know exactly what minute of the hr it is- at that makes a huge diff on test day . Gosh, people who were able to use those silent timers were soo lucky!
Any suggestions? I'm thinking getting those kids watches..
« on: November 14, 2007, 09:22:52 PM »
I took all the preptests from the "Next 10" and now I am thinking of working backwards to the preptests from the "More 10" and etc. However, do the tests prior to "Next 10" good studying tools? B/c I keep hearing from people that the games have changed and the LR and RC have gotten tougher.
Should I still do them?
Assuming that those preptests are "easier," how many points on avg should I deduct to know where I am really standing?
Thanks so much!
« on: November 11, 2007, 12:51:30 AM »
My g-d, this game took over the 8:40 sec. It took forever to diagram and do the linking/deductions! Way more time consuming than the birds in the forest game.
Any suggestions as to how to do this game more quickly? I was thinking that instead of wasting time coming of with all the possible links before I do the questions that I should just go on to the questions and develop them the links as I go through them.
« on: November 07, 2007, 12:11:51 AM »
Can someone explain this to me? I did the sufficient/necessary diagram. But, it did not help to figure out the correct answer.
Agricultural economist: We can increase agricultural production without reducing biodiversity, but only if we abandon conventional agriculture. Thus, if we choose to sustain economic growth, which requires increasing agricultural production, we should radically modify agricultural techniques.
Which of the following principles, if valid, most help to justify the agricultural economists's reasoning?
Credited Response: Economic growth should not be pursued at the expense of a loss of biodiversity.
The other answer choices: a) agricultural production should be reduced if doing so would increase biodiversity.
c) economic growth should be sustained only as long as agricultural production continues to increase.
d) preserving biodiversity is no more important than increasing agricultural production.
e) agricultural techniques should be radically modified only if doing so would further the extent to which we can increase agricultural production.