<p>DID ANYONE GET 1420 FOR THE LAST QUESTION IN ONE OF THE MATH SECTIONS? It was something with a graph about kids missing 1-3 days of school, and that 5% of the kids missed 1 day. Then they asked you to find the total number of kids in the school. This wasn’t experimental because my experimental was reading.</p>
<p>It was 1600, not 1420</p>
<p>did anyone put possibly mistaken instead of has not yet been proven wrong? The second passage presents some evidence that proves it wrong, and he states in the first passage that he is a little iffy about his whole theory</p>
<p>^ Where did he state that he was “a little iffy”? It seemed to me that he was confident that the ape had not yet grasped English grammar conventions.</p>
<p>when he states that his theory may be seem far fetched and unreasonable</p>
<p>he was saying it might SEEM like that but he provides sufficient evidence to show otherwise</p>
<p>The passag isn’t even stating that a change in circular motion occurred he’s just saying that it wasnt a cause, bolstering his point that science isnt the cause of interest. Plus, isn’t it too ambiguous to conclude that this “study” you seem to be some how getting actually happened in 1951? We KNOW that the sales campaign was a change in those years and, more over, it CAUSED this change in YoYo sales, ipso facto, this was the correct answer.</p>
<p>^^ Yeah, I agree. He wasn’t conceding anything, just saying that his argument might appear unreasonable but really isn’t.</p>
<p>@Divy: I see where you’re coming from, but I need to see the original passage/question to confirm. If there was something like “advances in/new contained circular motion,” then that implies discovery (but that part was edited in the SAT passage, and I don’t have a memory of steel). Also, the line reference restricted the question to a certain paragraph/section, so I drew my conclusion using those lines. I could definitely have misinterpreted that part, so there’s no need for hostility. I’m just telling you what I remember (and memory isn’t always reliable).</p>
<p>What do you guys think of the curve for the math section? I’m so mad at myself because I made the stupidest error in math: for the probability grid in question, I put 0.41 instead of 9/22 or 0.409. </p>
<p>I really wanted a 800 and this stupid mistake probability cost me that</p>
<p>and for what question was “readily willing to challenge preconceived notions” the answer, wasnt that the insufficiently skeptical one?</p>
<p>Im in multivariate calc so dont assume im dumb. But there were 8 kids who missed 2 days, and 1 kid who missed 3 days. If you added all of the days missed on the graph, it added to 90 (still have it on my calculator). Then you subtract 8<em>2 for the total days that the kids who missed 2 days missed, and subtract 1</em>3 for the days that the kid who missed 3 days missed. </p>
<p>90-16-3=71</p>
<p>71 days are the total days that the kids who missed 1 day missed. This means that there were 71 kids who missed 1 day, and the question told you that the kids who missed 1 day made up 5% of the whole student body. </p>
<p>(5/100) * x = 71
x = 1420</p>
<p>I probably missed something but can someone tell me where I’m wrong? thanks.</p>
<p>What was the answer to the question that said root x = y and what has to equal 0. Was it y squared - x?</p>
<p>yea y^2 -x =0</p>
<p>Of these four math questions, which were experimental?
Cube surface area, half square, triangle perimeter, and f(9) < f(7).</p>
<p>mathmoneyman-you substract 8 and 2 not 16 and 3 because you’re trying to find how many kids were absent and you removed 9 people from that number</p>
<p>Thanks mathmoneyman. The problem with your answer was you subtracted all the kids that missed school more than one. You had to take 90 subtract it by 8 and then by 2 and divide by .05.</p>
<p>@Ccmiami I don’t think any of those were experimental.</p>
<p>for the writing did you put responding to this problem or nevertheless?</p>
<p>for the one 2B1 and 2B3 divided by 11, was it remainder 7?</p>
<p>@raj yes 10char</p>
<p>Also: I put nevertheless</p>