求解

老李同志

People’s television-viewing habits could be monitored by having television sets, when on, send out low-level electromagnetic wavesthat are reflected back to the sets. The reflected waves could then be
analyzed to determine how many persons are within the viewing area
of the sets. Critics fear adverse health effects of such a monitoring
system, but a proponent responds, “The average dose of radiation is
less than one chest x-ray. As they watch, viewers won’t feel a thing.”
Which of the following issues would it be most important to resolve
in evaluating the dispute concerning the health effects of the proposed
system?
1. Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can
distinguish between people and pets
2. Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle
of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
3. Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various
areas of the country or in a single area only
4. What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
5. Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a
short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose



我觉得五个都错了
求大神 帮我解释一下

老李同志

还有一题

The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from
military contractors is determined by a pricing method called
“historical costing.” Historical costing allows contractors to protect
their profits by adding a percentage increase, based on the current rate
of inflation, to the previous year’s contractual price.
Which of the following statements, if true, is the best basis for a
criticism of historical costing as an economically sound pricing
method for military contracts?
1. The government might continue to pay for past inefficient
use of funds.
2. The rate of inflation has varied considerably over the past
twenty years.
3. The contractual price will be greatly affected by the cost of
materials used for the products.
4. Many taxpayers question the amount of money the
government spends on military contracts.
5. The pricing method based on historical costing might not
encourage the development of innovative weapons.

我也觉得没一个对了  求解释

alzn2765

第一题，E正确。

需要搞清楚这个支持者说的monitoring system的辐射不比一次X光的辐射更多，指的是让这个monitioring system射一次的辐射量还是让这个monitoring system射一辈子的辐射量？如果是前者就可以证明这个system基本对人体无害，谁一辈子照一次X光肯定也死不了；但如果是system每射一次的辐射量都相当于照一次X光的话，那日积月累还不把使用者都射死？

alzn2765

老李同志 发表于 2015-5-12 17:07
还有一题

The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from

这个方案有一个“天生”的缺陷：只能加价，不能减价。要是万一某种武器以后变便宜了呢？比如掌上电脑20前年算高科技的昂贵设备，但现在满大街都是，不值钱了。如果按照这个方法，就只能让采购价格越来越贵，而不会越来越便宜，或者政府在这20年里都没有纠正自己当初过高购买价格的机会。
A.的意思就是说，假如这武器刚开始买贵了，用这个方法会延续当初的错误，没机会纠正过来。

ukyo2003

老李，你一次贴了2个，我很犹豫要不要一个个和你一起分析。。。

ukyo2003

老李，OA是什么？我的理解如下：

People’s television-viewing habits could be monitored by having television sets, when on, send out low-level electromagnetic wavesthat are reflected back to the sets. The reflected waves could then be analyzed to determine how many persons are within the viewing area of the sets. Critics fear adverse health effects of such a monitoring system, but a proponent responds, “The average dose of radiation is less than one chest x-ray. As they watch, viewers won’t feel a thing.” Which of the following issues would it be most important to resolve in evaluating the dispute concerning the health effects of the proposed system? 监控电视观众有辐射。反对者说辐射很小，不影响人。 问evaluation：1、如果辐射很小，但是是长期效应，也可能影响人；2、即使小于one chest x-ray的辐射也可以影响人；3、观众感觉不到不等于没有伤害 1. Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets (错误1、引入新概念pet；2、原文无此对比) 2. Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation (引入新概念错) 3. Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only (原文无此对比) 4. What uses are foreseen for the viewership data  (完全无关) 5. Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose (符合eavluation 1，正确)

ukyo2003

老李同志 发表于 2015-5-12 17:07
还有一题

The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from

第二题我的理解

The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from military contractors is determined by a pricing method called “historical costing.” Historical costing allows contractors to protect their profits by adding a percentage increase, based on the current rate of inflation, to the previous year’s contractual price.
Which of the following statements, if true, is the best basis for a criticism of historical costing as an economically sound pricing method for military contracts?
军火价格根据往年价格和通货膨胀来波动是合理的。问削弱：
solution：通货膨胀不能削弱，这是符合市场规律的。原材料上涨也不能削弱。所以往年价格有问题。

1. The government might continue to pay for past inefficient use of funds. (直接攻击往年价格，perfect answer)
2. The rate of inflation has varied considerably over the past twenty years. (两个错误：1、不能攻击inflation；2、过去20年不等于现在还是这样，看到20年就可以排除了)
3. The contractual price will be greatly affected by the cost of materials used for the products. (不能攻击原材料价格)
4. Many taxpayers question the amount of money the government spends on military contracts. (两个错误：1、看到many就排除；2、taxpayers算老几，排除)
5. The pricing method based on historical costing might not encourage the development of innovative weapons. (看到新概念innovative就排除)

晓嘉听话

ukyo2003 发表于 2015-6-6 10:24
第二题我的理解

The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from military contrac ...

我做的时候选的B,
我觉得B理解也是通的啊，因为inflation rate再过去是一直变化的，说明可高可低，那你始终用一种计算方式就可能吃亏了。。。。也没什么毛病啊。。。。唯一可能不对的就是这里的varied并没有说清楚是在通胀变低的情况吧。。。。而A是很明确的指出inefficient。。

不知道我这样理解对不对。