<p>what would a -2 get??</p>
<p>Seriously - it’s obvious for the dice problem. There are charts for this that have been linked. Your arguments as to why 556 565 and 655 are not any different is equivalent to saying there’s a 1/36 chance of getting 3 why two dice because you can get only 12 and 21 doesn’t matter because order doesn’t matter. That’s simply bad math.</p>
<p>"snoopi, well its hard to look at that way. this is the way i did the problem:</p>
<p>chance of getting 18; 1/6 <em>1/6</em> 1/6=1/216, no argument there, pretty simple.
chance of getting 17: now i put 1/6 <em>1/6</em> 1/6=1/216. my thinking here is that you need THREE specific numbers, two sixes and a five. the chance of getting a five is not any less than the chance of getting another six, the rolls are INDEPENDENT of eachother. the fact that you got two sixes means that you need either another five or six, so to simplify,
1/6 <em>1/6</em> 2/6=1/108.
if there is any flaw here, please clearly correct me."</p>
<p>That’s true if you only get 2 6’s in a roll. Your math doesn’t account for the chances of getting a 5 in the first or second roll.</p>
<p>I picked 1/108. I concede that this is clearly wrong, as many other people have proven that you are TWICE as likely to roll a 17 or 18 (4 options) than the 2 option school of thought (the 1/108 crew).</p>
<p>It’s illogical to argue that you are not as likely to roll something that mathematical statistics clearly prove. We were penalized by not knowing how to actually solve the problem. 1/54 is clearly the right answer.</p>
<p>yes, but you base the probability off the other rolls. if you put 2/6 first, and get a five, then you still need two sixes.</p>
<p>“yes, but you base the probability off the other rolls. if you put 2/6 first, and get a five, then you still need two sixes.”</p>
<p>What?</p>
<p>this might sound stupid but how did you get 15 for the price of 65 dollars on paperback books??</p>
<p>$65 dollars spent; 25 books purchased
15 paperback books for $15
10 hardback books for $50</p>
<p>whatever. i dont think i got better than 720 anyway so the math on this test doesnt matter.</p>
<p>i put 1/108, im sorry im not seeing the logic in getting 1/54, getting 1/54 makes it sound like a freakin slot machine with each reel labeled 1-6 
screw it, whats -1? 790, 780?</p>
<p>Okay, random question. Did someone get “27” as an answer somewhere? It was asking how many people listened/watched/whatever-the-verb-was to both X and Y.
It might have been on my experimental section, though… I’m not sure.</p>
<p>@fmpak93, -1 will probably be a 780, or even a 790.</p>
<p>And yes, 27 was an answer for the Venn diagram question.</p>
<p>Okay, thanks.
And the graph one, asking about the difference between the max and min?
I think I made a dumb mistake.</p>
<p>crzygmer, i think this math section was easier then march, and that was -1 is 770</p>
<p><a href=“http://homepage.smc.edu/mcgraw_colleen/math_52/dice%20roulette.pdf[/url]”>http://homepage.smc.edu/mcgraw_colleen/math_52/dice%20roulette.pdf</a>
those are all 216 possibilities of rolling 3 dice…count them if you want, hope this ends the debate.
what would -2 get??</p>
<p>@jetscm4ev I got an 800 in March and thought this was was a little harder. Definitely the hardest of the three I’ve taken. Just hoping -1 is a 780 or 790.</p>
<p>it’s a general consensus that this was hard? out of curiosity, did any of you take the SAT last october? how would you say it was comparable to this one?</p>
<p>^I took the october sat last year, and I think that one was easier than this one.</p>
<p>what would -7 and 2 omitted be?</p>
<p>what would 3 ommitted and -5 be ?</p>