198
@brownaspirant i got 197 because to find the number in the list, you do median number (99)x2-1. If you just write a short list of 7 numbers, the median is 4. To get 7, you do 4x2-1
I got 197 and all you had to do was go up to 17 and find the median which would be 9; using that reasoning the ones digit had to be a 7 which left me with 197
omg… of all the ones to get wrong… this one…
so i can still get 770?
Makes sense, thanks. Also, the second to last grid-in was worded somewhat ambiguously. That was the question where Person A earned half as much as Person B and Person C earned twice as much as Person B. It asked how much Person C made if “they” earned $168. They was an ambiguous pronoun because it did not distinguish whether or not to include person B in the total amount earned. Any thoughts?
@brownaspirant Okay, so to solve this I pretended the list was a shorter list starting at 1 and ending in some odd number with “k” in the middle. Ex: 1,2,3,4,k,6,7,8,9. Now, what is the relationship between the last number (9) and k? Well, 9 is four places away from k, which, incidentally, is the same number of places the first number (1) is from k. Does this mean that the last number in such a list is always the same amount of places away from the middle (k) as the first number? I also tried it with a different list: 1,2,k,4,5. Again, the last odd number (5) is exactly the same amount of places away from “k” as 1 is! I used the same reasoning with the actual question. In the actual question, this unknown “k” was the last number, and the median (99) was given. How far is 99 from 1? 98 places. Now, by the logic of my previous lists, the unknown k must also be 98 places from the middle, or 99. Thus 99 + 98 = 197, which was my answer. Sorry for the long-winded explanation (I got a bit carried away). @Tocsss got a different answer than me, so I may be wrong, but what I wrote above was just my thought process, which could be erroneous.
yeah I remember that. But you would think that the pronoun stands for all of them A B C.
ugh I’m just so salty they reused June 2014 test and Im pretty sure that is the one practice exam I never took
@brownaspirant I thought all the people (A, B, & C) have their money added up to 168. A = 2B, C = B/2, and B, well, is just B. So 2B + B/2 + B = 168, and B (I think) came out to 48, but since the question asked for C, it was 48/2, or 24.
I just assumed that it was implied to take all three men into account, but I was still pretty worried nonetheless. I recall it being a rather simple problem where you set up your equation, solved for x, then plugged back in/multiplied by two to find how much the one person made.
@BenedictArnold yeah, I did the same thing and got the same answer so hopefully that’s what they meant.
@JuicyMango for wood/steel question, I think i put something about using less or more in the future. I thought that the choice about using steel if it was more efficient was wrong because it said “only” and therefore too extreme and specific. “Only” “never” “always” etc questions are wrong like 4/5 times.
@garyasho2 i put economic fairness too, im pretty sure thats right
@garyasho2 that was a different question but i cant remember what the question was
untenable or incoherent
@Boltingflame i think you misread the question… Yes, the shortest route would take 9 side lengths, but each side length was 2 units. so 9x2=18
@Boltingflame the answer for that one should’ve been 18 because each side length of a square was 2, so 9 x 2 = 18 (oops didn’t see the post above me =P)
@eljefe123 It was untenable.
C