<p>
</a></p>
<p>To saw a board into 2 pieces, it takes 10 mins.
–> To saw it into 1 pieces, it’ll take 5 minutes. (10/2)
–> To saw it into 3 pieces, it’ll take (5*3)=15 mins.
Basic unitary method.</p>
<p>another way to do it</p>
<p>2/10 = 3/x</p>
<p>30=2x</p>
<p>x=15</p>
<p>I hope you guys are joking.</p>
<p>To saw the board into 2 pieces you have to make one cut. That cut takes 10 minutes.</p>
<p>To saw the board into 3 pieces you have to make two cuts. Each one takes 10 minutes.</p>
<p>The answer is 20 minutes just like the kid said. The teacher is wrong.</p>
<p>^ you’re thinking it too literally.</p>
<p>Then why give a literal question? I can see the teachers reasoning, but you don’t with n=0 pieces, you start with n=1 pieces.</p>
<p>The teacher is wrong, because of the wording of the question. 15 minutes is the time it would take to get to three starting from 0; however, the questions asks one to get to 3 starting from 1.</p>
<p>Only 1 cut was made, not 2, after 10 minutes.</p>
<p>
This is correct.</p>
<p>
Haha</p>
<p>I think maybe they mean sawing 2 pieces away from a board versus sawing 3 pieces away from a board. Then 15 would make sense.</p>
<p>Sawing two pieces away from the board would mean sawing it into three pieces. If that is what was meant, the writer made a mistake and instead created a question with an answer of 20.</p>
<p>
I think I could saw a board into one piece in a heck of a lot less than five minutes… ;)</p>
<p>I would respond twenty minutes because the action of cutting should not be significantly impacted by the length of the board segments.</p>
<p>It’s an infinite board. The third section isn’t considered a “piece”. Thus 2 cuts made the board into 2 pieces (and leave behind an infinite section), and 3 cuts are needed to saw 3 pieces from the board (and leave behind another infinite section).</p>
<p>1 cut = 10 minutes
2 cuts = 20 minutes
etc,</p>
<p>
From what are you deriving these assumptions?</p>
<p>Also, I noticed the stars next to the questions. I only ever got math problems with stars (indicating difficulty) in elementary schools.</p>
<p>We have to give the teacher the benefit of the doubt. The student must be penalized if he/she interprets the problem differently from the way the teacher intended the problem to be.</p>
<p>It’s also possible that the verb “saw” is not talking about the cutting action that separates the pieces, but another action that shapes the pieces. So 5 minutes would be needed to saw 1 chunk of the board into 1 “piece”, and 10 minutes are needed to saw 2 chunks of the board into 2 “pieces” (assuming the cutting time needed to split it is negligible), and 15 minutes are needed to saw 3 chunks of the other board into 3 “pieces”.</p>
<p>@BillyMc: these assumptions are based on the Teacher’s writings in red. Traditionally, red means the teacher wrote it, so it must be correct. Then from there we have to interpret the problem accordingly.</p>
<p>@XRCatD: Please tell me you are joking. If the teacher interpreted the problem that way, then the teacher is an idiot. I don’t care if they grade the work - they’re still an idiot.</p>
<p>
No, we have to interpret the problem based on the words used. And even if one piece was infinite, cutting off two pieces would be cutting one board into three boards. If the infinite board cannot be called a board in that context, then there never was one board to begin with. Your logic is flawed.</p>
<p>
Show me a definition of the word “saw” that would fit this. Or does “how long” actually mean “the answer multiplied by 3/4”? Because that’s as plausible as your above paragraph.</p>
<p>Sarcasm is lost in translation over the internet.</p>
<p>saw: (v) saw (cut with a saw) “saw wood for the fireplace”
cut: (v) cut (separate with or as if with an instrument) “Cut the rope”
(WordNet)</p>
<p>So, “saw” refers to the act of separation.</p>
<p>saw: (v, used with object) to form by cutting with a saw. (dictionary.com)</p>
<p>^ Do you have a point? Look up the definition of cut.</p>