6/16 JJ

emily4ever

Arguement:在XX地方，XX theatre, XXX pizza, and XX golf Club都profit，所以Capital Idea应该在另一个地方XXX也invest三个类似的东东。为了更多profit，应该向对其中两种有忠诚度的customers，提供对第三种东西discount，这样对第三个business也会忠诚的。（大概这个意思，hoho）

Issue: No art exhibition or public performance should be cancelled because of the community's objection to its content.

数学记得不是特别清楚了。。。一点也想不起来。。。

Verbal：

阅读：是有文化还是没文化，根据一个原始社会什么什么的，相同visual，不同vocal什么的，就是看见一种东西，可以表达同一种意思，但是melody阿wording阿不一定一样；野生植物domesticate，共三段，一段，wild什么什么的怎么特点，二段，为什么当初没把它们domesticate，啥啥啥，三段，现在研究怎么把wild domesticate保留优点，去除缺点；洞穴好多通道，以前也为是保持恒温的，现在认为是保持humidity etc并且保证一种动物只有他活着，其他的都活不了的；第一篇怎么也想不起来了，只记得不长。

逻辑：有一道bold face是GWD原题，当时就选错了，今天估计也错了，是宇航员阿sulfur阿什么的。还有一道原题，是两个公司怎么怎么样，since一划线，选都没有overtime工资的那个。

差不多，有想起来的，再往上补。大家加油！

GMAT小飞侠

先谢谢楼主啦

yunyunyue

没事,慢慢想,谢谢了~~~

csg525

LZ好好想想数学JJ吧。。。。。。。。。。我们是那么的渴望。。。

usocean

逻辑：有一道bold face是GWD原题，当时就选错了，今天估计也错了，是宇航员阿sulfur阿什么的。还有一道原题，是两个公司怎么怎么样，since一划线，选都没有overtime工资的那个。

楼主说的是不是这个：

Astronomer:  Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were.  Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere.  After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.  The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.  Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A.      The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.

B.       The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.

C.      The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.

D.      The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

E.       The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

实战出这么长的CR啊，真是恐怖啊。

能再仔细回忆一下另外一个CR吗？我再查查原文。谢谢啦

dominique_xy

41 GWD-29-Q28

Astronomer:  Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were.  Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere.  After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.  The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.  Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A.    The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.

B.    The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.

C.    The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.

D.    The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

E.     The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

答案：C

Eimi

楼主再回忆下逻辑吧，我们热切等待着~~

emily4ever

以下是引用dominique_xy在2009-6-16 23:23:00的发言：

41 GWD-29-Q28

Astronomer:  Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were.  Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere.  After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.  The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.  Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A.    The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.

B.    The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.

C.    The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.

D.    The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

E.     The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

答案：C

对的，就是这个！！！

emily4ever

另外一个是这个：

GWD-8-Q31: GWD-2-12’

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Yorco and Zortech are two corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour.  Publicly available records indicate that Yorco employs roughly the same number of such hourly wage workers as Zortech does but spends a far higher total sum per year on wages for such workers.  Therefore, hourly wages must be higher, on average, at Yorco than at Zortech, since _____.

A.      Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages

B.       the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does

C.      the proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech

D.      overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech

E.       the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech

emily4ever

数学想起来一个，说是两个数，6a7，3b5，都能被9整除，问a+b=一个数字（具体数字记不太清楚了）？

(1)a+b>10

(2)也是a和b怎么的一个关系

这个题挺有意思的，根据6a3，3b5，根据这两个数字能被9整除，可以算出来，a可以有两个解9和0，b只能有一个解7，然后根据（1）（2）任意一个条件都能推出来结论。

还有一个，2~29质数的乘积加1，以下哪个肯定对？

（1）能被2~29的一个质数整除

（2）能被比29大的质数整除

（3）能被30整除

A只有(1)对

B只有（2）对

选项大概就是这样，不全列出来了阿，（1）（3）肯定不对，无个选项又没有三个全不对的选项，我就选了只有（2）对。