PSAT 2010 Wednesday General Discussion

<p>^Yeah, unfortunately.</p>

<p>Oh, what was the last answer for the Math section?
640 or something?</p>

<p>I saw that answer somewhere on this board, but I can’t remember what it was about.</p>

<p>Well I haven’t looked at the consolidated answers, but I got 640 and am pretty sure it is right. I check every single question three times.</p>

<p>You took 10, cube rooted it, multiplied 2.xxxxx by 4, and then cubed it for 640.</p>

<p>Wait, i thought it was “sever” not “curtail”</p>

<p>Wait…how are you guys soo sure it is curtail? I thought it was sever…cuz no funds = no project…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The curtail one was not a giveaway, but kind of obvious when you thought of the context. I was down to apocryphal and canonical (don’t know either), and just picked apocryphal because it sounds like a bad thing.</p>

<p>Apocryphal (meaning spurious or deceitful) was right, curtail was right, 640 was right.

You don’t multiply by 4; you add 4. However, 640 is correct.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Err… I’m 80% positive it is curtail, but I may be wrong. I actually was caught between curtail and eradicate, but eradicate and sever mean the same thing right? And my rationale (and this according to my memory now) is that the person did not have enough funds to carry out the project (there was an emphasis on the scale of the project as being immense), so I thought that it just meant that the project would be cut short. </p>

<p>What’s your take on it?</p>

<p>what was the “apocryphal question”</p>

<p>for the question with the sqrt(x+7)-5 was it that it had to be greater than 0 and x had to be less than 60?</p>

<p>jmdo12: I think you thought waaaay too deep into the question. Who else would think like that? Although I see where yours could possibly be right, I still think that impair/minimize is a much better option.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Are you positive? I am almost certain that it said the length of Cube Q was 4 times that of Cube P.</p>

<p>I thought eradicate was too strong of a word…and it was between curtail and sever for me…and I just have never heard someone curtail a project…they sever it or cut it off if they have no money…they don’t just let half of the project/program exist…in my opinion…I really don’t know…there seem to be a lot more ppl saying curtail on this thread…so only Collegeboard knows what the right answer is :/</p>

<p>I don’t see how buttress (as in support) could work.</p>

<p>If I remember the question correctly, it said something along the lines of “scientists found only inconclusive evidence, which _____ the correlation.”</p>

<p>Inconclusive evidence wouldn’t support the correlation.</p>

<p>Jmdo12 said that he remembered the question as “only inconclusive evidence to support the correlation,” but I don’t think they used the word “to”.</p>

<p>640, yep. I completely forgot the meaning of cube. Ugh.
It’s curtail. I thought sever was just too harsh of a word, if that made any sense at all.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Although I cannot remember the question verbatim, I can get the general sense. You take a number, add seven to it, square it, subtract 5, and it has to be an integer greater than 0. So I picked 42. Now that my train of though is over, I can say that you are correct.</p>

<p>^^^ agreeed…inconclusive evidence does not support evidence</p>

<p>So if I omitted 3 questions, about how many do I need to get wrong to get above a 220?</p>

<p>I’m guessing…like eight?</p>

<p>■■■ for living in California.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Just wondering, what was the consensus on the right answer for this? I spent quite some time on this question and even dazed off a bit (5 hour of sleep <= not a good idea). I think I picked something with quantify and I have a feeling that that is wrong.</p>

<p>^^^^The question was asking what number(s) would induce a positive integer if added to the equation.</p>