Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Choose the most appropriate option:
A, B, C and D have got some money with them. If A gives 8 rupees to B, B will have as much as C has and A will have 3 rupees less than what C has. Also if A takes 6 rupees from C, A will have twice as much money as D. If B and D together have 50 rupees, how much money does A and B have respectively?
विकल्प
40, 27
29, 32
32, 29
27, 40
Advertisements
उत्तर
40, 27
Explanation:
Let the amount of B is x
Then, A = x + 13
B = x
C = x + 8
and D = `("x" + 19)/2`
Now B + D = 50
x + `("x" + 19)/2` = 50, x = 27
Therefore, A = x + 13 ⇒ 27 + 13 = ₹ 40
and C = x + 8 ⇒ 27 + 8 = ₹ 35
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
All men are chairs. John Doe is a man. In logical language, therefore:
The question contains six statements followed by four sets of combinations of three. Choose the set, which gives the most logical triad. i.e. the third statement mentioned should be a conclusion drawn from the first two statements.
Statements:
- Some men are of short- height.
- Short-heighted men are intelligent.
- Sudhir is a man.
- Sudhir is of short-height.
- Sudhir is intelligent.
- AII men are intelligent.
CUP : LIP :: BIRD : ?
Microphone : Loud :: Microscope : ?
Master : OCUVGT :: LABOUR : ?
Read the following case and answer the question.
Sakshi is the Vice-President in an electrical equipment company in Delhi. One day, her subordinate Bhaskar requested that Kishen, a project manager, be transferred to the Mumbai office from the Delhi office. In Mumbai, Kishen would work alone as a researcher. Bhaskar gave the following reasons for his request "Kishen is known for fighting frequently with colleagues of his team. He cannot accept criticism and feels rejected and get hostile. He is overbearing and is generally a bad influence on the team. Sakshi called upon Samir, another project manager and sought further information on Kishen. Samir recalled that a former colleague, Lalit (who was also Kishen's former boss) has made few remarks on Kishen in his appraisal report. In his opinion, Kishen was not fit for further promotion as he was emotionally unstable to work in groups in spite of the fact that he had seven years of work experience. Lalit has described Kishen as too author it alive to work under anyone. Lalit has further told Samir that Kishen had an ailing wife and an old mother, who does not want to stay with his wife.
Consider the following solutions to the problem mentioned above
I. Sakshi should transfer Kishen to Mumbai office.
II. Sakshi should try and verify the facts from other sources as well.
III. Kishen should be sacked.
IV. Kishen should be demoted.
V. Sakshi should suggest Kishen to visit a family counsellor.
Which of the following would be the most appropriate sequence of decisions in terms of immediacy starting from immediate to a long term solution?
Read the following short passage and choose the best answer to the questions following the passage.
Columnist: Senators who are not firmly committed to a core set of beliefs will formulate new campaign strategies and moot points before each upcoming election. Senators are elected to serve multiple terms in office only if they formulate new campaign strategies and moot points before each upcoming election. Therefore, senators who are not firmly committed to a core set of beliefs are elected to serve multiple terms in office.
Which one of the following displays a flawed pattern of reasoning most closely parallel to that in the columnist's argument?
The question below is given a statement followed by two assumptions numbered I and II. An assumption is something supposed or taken for granted. You have to consider the statement and the following assumptions and decide which of the assumptions is implicit in the statement.
Statement Many species of animals on our earth are still not studied scientifically and if we do not do this work urgently, many species will face extinction.
Assumptions
- Earth may lose all types of life very shortly.
- It is desirable and possible to study scientifically many animal species.
The question below is given a statement followed by two courses of action. The course of action is a step for administrative the decision to be taken for improvement, follow-up, or further action in regard to the problem, policy, etc. On the basis of the information given in the statement, you have to assume everything in the statement to be true, then decide which of the given suggested courses of action is/are logically worth pursuing.
Statement The cream of India's Cricket team is likely to retire in the next three years leaving a vacuum that the Indian Cricket team is going to struggle to overcome.
Course of Action
- The BCCI should start to induct youngsters into the team and start to give them exposure to pressure situations.
-
There should be a rotation policy adopted for senior players in order to prolong their careers and keep them injury-free.
In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments must be both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspects of the question. The question below is followed by three arguments numbered I, II, and ill. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.
Statement
- Should there be a limit on drawing groundwater for irrigation purposes in India?
Arguments
- No, irrigation is of prime importance for food production in India and it is heavily dependent on groundwater in many parts of the country.
- Yes, water tables have gone down to alarmingly low levels in some parts of the country where irrigation is primarily dependent on groundwater, which may lead to serious environmental consequences.
- Yes, India just cannot afford to draw groundwater any further as the international agencies have cautioned India against it.
