ZDS

See my comment on your other post for the first question. http://www.www.urch.com/forums/gre-math/157688-plzz-solve.html 4. Given a series of numbers... The standard deviation measures the average distance from the mean. The range is the difference between the highest, and the lowest, numbers. Technically speaking, a series is actually the sum of a set of numbers, so I am going to presume that a "set" of numbers was meant. Let's try the most basic set of numbers. If we have the following set {1,1} then we would have the range = 0. We would also have the standard deviation = 0. Given this, we must conclude that "D" is the only acceptable answer. As we progress into sets that have different values at all, you would find that the range is always larger than the SD. 3. There was a ladder given. The ladder is of length 5 and it is displaced i.e slanted downwards such that it falls 'x'mts in height and its horizontal length increases by 'y'mts. If we take this to the maximum, the ladder has fallen 5m and it will have gone out vertically 5m as well. So already we can rule out A and B. If the ladder starts vertical, and it falls 1m what is the state that we are in? The length will still be 5. The height on the wall will have fallen from 5 -> 4. So then Y must be equal to 3 (3-4-5 right triangle!). X = 1, Y = 3. Therefore, D.

7. Given that if an average of first 5 numbers of a particular set of 12 numbers is 6 and average of all these 12 numbers is 7.5 then find the average of first 7 numbers is? This question appears slightly strange to me. My guess is that there is a typo, and it is meant to read "then find the average of the last 7 numbers." If there is no typo, what can we conclude? First, the only way we will make meaningful progress is if we assume that the numbers are in ascending order. Consider what it means to have the average of the first 5 numbers equal to 6. Definitionally, if you were to sum over the first 5, and then divide by 5 you would have 6. We can also conclude that the sum of the first 5 numbers must be equal to 30. What about for the entire set? Well, we have 12 numbers, with an average of 7.5. With the total sum, we can solve for what the final 7 numbers must sum to. If the question had a typo, we could therefore conclude that the final 7 must average to 8.6 ©. With no typo, we can simply conclude that numbers 6 and 7 must be less than or equal to 8.6... Given this information, we can only say (A) or (B). AFAIK, there is no other way to go about this. I think it is more likely to be a typo! 3. Two flasks are of cylindrical shape.One flask has base area 8*pi and other has base area 4*pi.The 1st flask is filled with water upto 3 inches and 2nd flask is filled with water upto 1inch. Find the final height of water in second flask if some of the water from flask 1 is to be poured into flask2 to make both the heights equal ? In this question we are looking to relate height and volume. The volume of a cylinder is equal to "Base Area * Height". So then, for volumes, we have: V1 = 3*8pi = 24pi V2 = 1*4pi = 4pi If the heights are equal, what relationship can be derived between the two cylinders (corresponding to volume?) Knowing this relationship, and knowing that the total volume is 28pi, we can solve for v2 easily. Now, to make sure this makes sense, let's solve for what the height would be in v1, given the same relationship! Great! 7. Given that a circle C passes through points (8,0) and (0,6) then Col.a: The diameter of the circle is Col.b: 10 A circle requires three points in order to be drawn uniquely. With only 2 we cannot conclude whether the line from point a to point b is the diameter, or simply a chord. Let's for a second presume that it IS the diameter. How long is the line? Now, if this line is a diameter that makes "C" the obvious choice. But, as we said, there is not any way to determine whether that line was the diameter or not. In fact, the shortest possibility is it being the diameter. So then the answer must be "D" since it can be equal to or greater than! (3^x) + 1/ (3^x) = ______ . What is the least possible value of the equation? I think this question must be asking "What value of X gives the least possible value of the equation?" To truly minimize this, the most straightforward way is to take the derivative and then solve for that equal to zero. Doing so gives: ln(3)*3^x - ln(3)/3^x = 0 Solving gives us x = 0. Now, why I say the quewstion must be asking about the least possible value of X is that, when plugging X = 0 in, it gives the answer 2. Therefore, the minimum value is 2 at X = 0. 9. A rectangle ABCD with sides AB= 16, BC=5. If a point 'P' is ploted on the side CD of the rectangle then what is the probability that the length of the BP is 13? This is a uniform distribution question. You should be able to determine that, with no calculations, there is only 1 point on the line CD that would give such a length. Further, because the line is 16 units long, it essentially runs from 0 to 16. The uniform distribution has probability 1/[a-b] for any point between a and b. In other words: 1/16

In this case, "all but" is not being used as a contrast phrase. It means "very nearly" (see this post conjunctions - "All but" idiom has two meanings? - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange for an explanation of the idioms.) You could say something like: "I all but died when I saw my GRE score after the first attempt." Which would translate to: "I very nearly died when I saw my GRE score after the first attempt." Similarly, in this sentence the sequel is very nearly full of _______. The blank that works here is "bombast" - which is essentially empty language. So in total the sentence is saying: "While her first novel was exciting, it seems that she ran out of material; the sequel was essentially just empty language designed to impress." It is a confusing idiom, and frankly a poorly phrased sentence. But hopefully the double meaning clears this up!

To start off, let's look at how taking a value for Y (Y can range from 2 - 9) limits the values for X. With Y = 9 (for instance), then X can range from [1,8] That means that for Y = 9 there are 8 combinations that work. Similarly if Y = 8, then X can range from [1,7] That means that for Y = 9 there are 7 combinations that work. To make this pattern more generic, what can we say about the number of combinations, given a certain value for Y? Now, how many different ways can we have Y equal to a certain value? In order for Y = 9, Z must be equal to 10. (So there is 1 combination) If we want Y = 8, then Z can be 10 or 9. (So there are two combinations) To make this pattern more generic, what can we say about the number of possible ways to generate a certain value of Y? Putting these patterns together, we can now just sum over Y! This is really a pattern recognition question. If you can understand how to determine the number of combinations for a given value of Y, then you should probably be able to get to the enumeration step rather quickly. If you miss the patterns, then it becomes a much more intensive calculation.

For Question (1): He could not bring himself to write a book that was dull/boring. In other words, something caused him to step away from writing a bad novel. If someone where deteriorating/declining that would likely cause them to write bad novels. They would fit if the sentence were: "It is a testimony to Roth's _____ that he wrote a book as dull and flat as his conception for his novel..." But he could not do this, so it suggests that he is not deteriorating! Persistence does not seem to make sense here - for it to work it would have to have the implication that through lots of work he bettered the idea. Ambition may fit, but there is no word similar enough to work. Genius / Talent are synonymous in this context and they suggest that he has a great ability! That is why they are the correct choices. I would not come to this answer through the sense of irony. It comes from the fact that his original conception was terrible, but he knew better than to go for it. Hopefully the above description helps arrive at the answer in a less convoluted fashion! Question 2. The idea here is that "For an artist with limited talent" makes the rest of the sentence seem unjustified. For instance, you would never say: "For an artist with immense talent, Van Gogh was given scrupulous talent..." because that is expected of an artist with great talent! "For" is acting as a comparison here. It is basically saying that he was given plenty of attention considering his lack of skill. Moving that clause to the end of the sentence (which can be done with introductory phrases) helps to clarify. Mario was given (i) _____ attention, for an artist of such circumscribed talent, many connoisseurs (ii) ____ over works that warranted nothing more than a(n) (iii) _____ glance. If the experts had given little attention; if the connoisseurs gave it little attention, or if the works warranted a detailed look this sentence would not make sense, as all of those things are to be expected of an artist with limited talent. Do not think of "for" as "because" in this case. It is not "because" he was limited in his talent. Experts gave him plenty of attention despite​ his limited talent.

The complicated word here is: Prudery. Let's operate under the assumption that we do not know what it means. [something] actually brings attention to a vice (negative trait) when it is supposed to _____. This sentence being phrased as "actually brings attention to" makes it sound as though this is opposite to the intended effect. You would say something like: "The food actually tasted pretty good." if the expectation would be that the food was no good. So if something "actually" brings attention to a trait, the implication is that it would normally have to hide the trait. We are looking for some word that means to hide! The act that does not allow speech or sight ______ what is hidden. Continuing from above, the implication is still the same. If something is supposed to disallow sight/speech, but (due to the structure of the first sentence) we know the opposite is true, what happens? It must exaggerate or bring attention to the speech/sight. (A) Repress - means to restrain or prevent. This is a pretty good fit for "hide". (B) Condemn - means to express disapproval of. This really is not opposite enough to "bringing attention to" to fit in the sentence. © Divulge - means to make known. This is the opposite word to "hide". The first sentence could have actually used divulge: ".. actually divulges the vice it is supposed to ___." Thus (A) must be the correct answer for the first blank! (D) Dramatizes - means to exaggerate (typically exaggerate somethings importance.) This is a pretty good fit for our word. (E) Distorts - means to make something unclear. This is not specific enough for our context. (F) Conceals - means to hide. This is again the opposite to the blank. The sentence could have read "the very act that conceals speech or sight ____ what is hidden." Thus (D) must be the correct answer for the second blank! --- Prudery comes from the word "prude." It is essentially the behaviour of those who are (too) easily offended. The purpose of prudery is to stop offensive behaviour. Knowing this helps slightly, though as shown above, it is ultimately unimportant!

For (7): (A) There is nothing mentioned about this here, clearly not correct. (B) "The formation of sea ice causes the concentration of salt in surface waters to increase; less sea ice would mean a smaller increase in the concentration of salt." This is the important sentence to demonstrate why (B) is wrong. If global warming occurs, there is less sea ice. Less sea ice means a smaller increase in salt, and thus the surface waters are less salty if global warming occurs. This means that they are currently more salty than if global warming were to occur. © "Less salty surface waters would be less dense and therefore less likely to sink and stir up deep water." Because the surface waters will be less salty if global warming occurs, therefore they are currently more likely to sink and stir-up the deep water. This is correct! (D) Nothing outside of Antarctica is mentioned. (E) This is backwards! For (8): (A) "The deep water, with all its stored heat, would rise to the surface at a slower rate." This means that he believes that currently - without global warming - they are rising more quickly than if global warming were to occur. This is correct! (B) He does not believe that the deep waters storing heat will exacerbate the effects - he believes they will mitigate them. © This is not mentioned anywhere. All that is mentioned is that the deep waters have "stored heat." There is no mention of the temperatures being increased! (D) The salinity of the deep water is never discussed - only the surface water. (E) This is again the opposite. They are more likely to be stirred up when the surface waters are salty than otherwise. Hopefully this makes some sense! Happy to clarify if needed!

I would agree that you should not do practice questions with a dictionary handy. What I would suggest, however, is to make note of words that you do not know. I would make flashcards (https://quizlet.com/ allows you to do so online) with these words. Later on, I would go back, make sure the definitions are known, and some examples of how they are used! You do not want your dictionary to be a crutch, but you also want to make sure that you are adding words to your vocabulary as you go!

The characters are proud of their wisdom and lack of illusions. Even despite this, they sometimes express unjustified ______? The two sentences run parallel with one another; the word in the blank should correspond to "pride", but it should do so in a negative sense (unjustified hints at that!) (A) Prevarication - the telling of a lie, particularly sneaky about doing so. (B) Satisfaction - fulfillment of wishes/desires © Self-flattery - The holding of a high opinion of one's self. (D) Affectation - Writing/speech that is designed to impress. (E) Narcissism - Excessive interest in one's self. (F) Indolence - Laziness Taking a look at this list, and the above analysis, the answers should jump out! If you were not able to puzzle through it, based on the hints in the sentence, knowing all of the words would have lead you to the correct answer as well! There are only two words in the list that have similar enough meanings to equate the two sentences!

The issue with your approach is that a line down the center of the outer square would not bisect the inner-square on an angle. If it did, you approach would work perfectly! Instead, we will have to use another property (namely the congruence of the triangles that are formed) to solve. See the attached thumbnail to get a sense of what is going on. First Step: Prove that the Triangles MUST be congruent. Second Step: Use (1) to Solve for Hypotenuse Length Third Step: Solve for the Two Areas

I was immediately confused in your answer here. I thought I would be reading about people, and your first sentence was regarding "customers". This needs more pre-amble. Grammatically this sentence should read: "For example: Apple uses only one button, instead of the three conventional buttons, taking emotional quotient into consideration. This makes the usability simpler for the end user." The comma is creates a comma splice - they are independent clauses. The "though" is unnecessary here. You are introducing it as though you are going to use Apple as a counter-point and you never do. (An example would have been something like: ) Content wise, your conclusion is not following directly from the evidence. How is it that designing the phone with one button takes into consideration emotions? You need to justify this better. (As a side note, you probably don't want to say "emotional quotient" here; instead "emotions" works nicer, as far as I understand your intentions!) You need a comma after "handles". The first chunk of that sentence is introductory, the remainder is the main clause. Check out rule 2 here. "were very easy to operate than normal pull type handles". This sentence is a comparison (the new handles vs. the old handles). As such "easy" is not correct in this context. You should use "easier". Easy is an adjective; to make a comparison you need a comparative adjective. "When stock prices plummeted in 2009 economic disaster." This is not a complete sentence, as such this period needs to be removed. There should be a comma before "and" as it is serving as a "conjunctive adverb" (rule #9). The idiom is "proved to be" not "proved out to be." Time is already plural - you do not need to say "times". "With an understanding of the subject" is a parenthetical statement, and as such should be set-off with commas: "... when you make emotional decisions, with an understanding of the subject, they turn out to be logical." With the grammar out of the way, what are my thoughts on the essay as a whole? First, I would like to see more structure in the essay. It helps to have an introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction needs to introduce the point you are going to make, and provide a clear thesis statement. The body should express your argument.It is very important to include counter arguments in your essay! Something to think about at the next issue essay you write : "What points would the other side make"? One major issue that I had with your response was your "conclusion sentence." It did not follow from your arguments. Your arguments suggest that in certain situations there are examples of people, or companies, making emotional decisions that lead to positive results. You did not suggest that most of the time this is the case. In your point regarding the economic disaster, this would be an excellent point to bring in a counter argument for. "During the Great Recession it proved to be fortuitous to purchase stock on gut instincts. However, this is not always the case. While individuals made great fortunes purchasing stock on emotional whims throughout the turbulent times, during times of economic stability emotional whims tend to result in depressed outcomes. Nevertheless, any great trader - from Buffet to Soros - will tell you that logical analysis can only get you so far. It must also feel right." Overall, your response had the starting blocks of an argument being constructed well. Examples strengthen arguments - which is always a good thing. Try to work on some of the grammar issues (which become better through practice!), the structure itself, and ensuring that you look at both sides of the issue! As a shameless plug - I have been working on Glib (https://getglib.com) which allows you to write a randomly selected essay/issue essay, and there is a community building up for feedback. I would really love it if you checked it out! For the first while, I will make sure to read every essay that people submit to the site - providing as much feedback as I can muster! I hope this was helpful, and let me know if you have any questions!

In this case you want to use: may be not maybe. In other words, it might be true... not It perhaps true. You should say "increased over the past year" or "increased over last year's" not "increased over last year" It should likely read "for the usage of" or "for using internet..." Further, the phrasing of this sentence is a little strange to me. I would consider writing something to the effect of: While it is true that Furniture Depot's sales have increased over the past year, the author's argument does not make a cogent case for the usage of internet services... The problem with your phrasing, from my perspective, is that it is definitely true that the sales went up. The question is why! In this case, "internet advertising company" is not a proper noun. As such, you need to use "an internet advertising company" It should read "how many customers" not "how many customer" The "did" in "did actually used" is unnecessary - it is correct to say "actually used" "A feedback" is not the correct usage. In this case, you should just write "feedback should have been..." It is my opinion that a more appropriate verb would be "collected" over "taken". Taken does not quite have the right connotation for this context. When used as a verb "back up" is always two words. "Backup" or alternatively "back-up" refers to a noun (as in a computer backup.) You should also include a comma before "but" in this sentence. "Employer Furniture depot" I am not sure why the word "Employer" is here; definitely not needed! Divide the first sentence in two - it runs on. I would say "over last year's totals. Instead..." It should be "last year's totals" not "last year totals" You should say "the author" not simply "author". It should read "various customers" not simply "customer." If we put together all of these grammar corrections your passage would have been: In terms of some overall thoughts: The essay did not follow a traditional structure. You should really try to work through Introduction -> Body -> Conclusion. The typical sentiment is to "Tell them what you are going to say; say it; tell them what you said." There was some semblance of this within the essay, but it could definitely be hatched out better. Your argument was not expressed clearly. The logical inconsistency that you are pointing out is that "causation does not equate to causation." You do mention this, albeit in a roundabout way. I think it would be beneficial to expressly mention: "The conclusion that the internet advertising caused the increase in sales is not supported by the evidence provided" You mentioned why it may not have been the case that the internet advertising caused the bump in sales for Furniture Depot, but what if it did? There is another problem with the argument being made! Can you spot it? Overall, there were aspects of the essay that demonstrated that you are on the right track. You found a large hole in the argument, which is definitely a good starting point. There is some grammar concerns throughout, some structural concerns, and you could use some more depth - all of which comes with practice! I hope this was helpful :)