<p>Yes, that was one of the questions for connection between P2 and P1</p>
<p>So was one of the answers P2 mocks P1</p>
<p>For the olfactory impression question was “influences” one of the answer choices?</p>
<p>@athena289</p>
<p>Oh, yeah, I think that was the answer. What were the other choices?</p>
<p>yes mocking was a choice,</p>
<p>no idea if its anise or molecules for the other question</p>
<p>Important Question: Does it matter if the calculator is in degree or radian mode for the SAT? Are there any questions where it could affect your answer? Isn’t the only difference between the 2 modes that they give you different answers when you plug in sin/cos/tan functions?</p>
<p>@MyRealName</p>
<p>All calculations will be the same on a calculator unless you use the trigonometry functions (including sin/cos/tan) and their inverses. </p>
<p>@MyRealName There were no sin/cos/tan functions or problems on the SAT so it doesn’t matter. </p>
<p>@clamsauce the answer was “notions”</p>
<p>I had 3 Math sections and 7 English sections. Anyone else have this? I was freaking out! Was the experimental san English section that had 34 questions?</p>
<p>Hi everyone! Got home yesterday and I didn’t want to think about the SAT anymore. But I totally bombed the math section and ommitted much more than I do on the practice tests I’ve taken, don’t know if the questions were harder, or if it was the nerves.</p>
<p>Anyways I’m not sure what the passage was about anymore, but it was two passages and it had like 5 questions asking what one author would think about the other author’s view, or what one author would think of the quote in the other author’s passage… I’m not used to seeing so many of these “what would one author think of the other” questions since on the 20+ practice tests I’ve taken there never have been that much. This sucks a lot because I always struggled with these questions, now to see 5 of them in one section. Anyhow, was this section experimental, or is it normal for there to be 5 of these? </p>
<p>@KA49641, do you mean 35 questions? If so, that was the writing section and no it was not experimental unless you had two sections with 35 questions. Regarding how many sections of each, I did not count haha.</p>
<p>There is supposed to be 3 Critical reading sections, 3 writing sections and 3 math sections. So it sounds like you got an English Experimental section 
</p>
<p>Can someone give me a good explanation of the point behind experimental sections? And does anyone know what passages were experimental?</p>
<p>^I reckon it’s in the name… “experimental”. They’re experimenting questions/section types, etc… But the sections with the passages about the Bijah, smells and plastics were not experimental.</p>
<p>Was the answer to one of the Bijah ones the wife and kids disappearing from the records?</p>
<p>Does experimental count against you?</p>
<p>@yankees7210 many people put that as the answer but it may not be correct</p>
<p>Did anyone get the math question with the circle and the 80º inner angle, what was the arc length, was 8 the length of the DIAMETER or the RADIUS??? I really need to know can someone pleaseeeeeee respond</p>
<p>Ok, I want to revisit the buzzing molecules question.</p>
<p>So, p2 says: “Vibration theory lay dormant for the past three decades largely because it lacks a plausible biological mechanism for converting intramolecular vibrations into neuronal activation.”</p>
<p>“Some receptors would actually feel the molecules buzz” is the quote.</p>
<p>Aren’t receptors biological mechanisms for converting intramoleculsr vibrations into neural activity? Wouldn’t he find fault with that statement?</p>
<p>No, the experimental section is not counted. </p>
<p>@MovingtoTexas , you’re looking too deep into it. Stop trying to convince yourself of the answer, I know, it’s hard to deal with, I’ve gone through those stages of denial myself </p>
<p>@MyRealName</p>
<p>You’re just a bucket of sunshine, aren’t you.</p>
<p>Not that I am completely sure of either answer being true, but how do you support that he would be against someone saying that something smells like something? If he believes every smell as subjective, then how would it possibly be proved in the first place? I’m just curious because he only find’s fault with Tupin (whatever his name was)‘s smelling and not with the other scientists’. He just says that their theory of buzzing molecules in receptors was incorrect and not able to be proved, not that their methods were subjective.</p>