A:(2 3 4 4 4)
B:(0 0 1 1 1
1 2)

A+B=Prime
2+0=2
2+1=3
3+0=3
3+2=5
4+1=5
4+1=5
4+1=5

7 possible pairs of how many? 3 of B and 5 of A, thus 3*5=15, 7/15

D)7/15

31. E
When we see what appears to be a lengthy arithmetic problem, we should look for ways to simplify the work. When fractions are involved, think about factoring the numerator and denominator, looking for terms that will cancel out.

In this case, 5.005 = 5 × 1.001, and 2.002 = 2 × 1.001. So we can rewrite the original fraction as 5.005/2.002 = 5(1.001)/2(1.001) = 5/2 = 2.5.

Choice (E) is correct.

Step 2: Untangle the Stimulus
The opponents of the ban on canoeing during flood stage conclude that such a ban is unwarranted if the only people harmed by the activity are those who consent to engage in it. in other words, the opponents propose that the local police lift the ban.

Step 3: Predict the Answer
To weaken this proposal, you need an answer that explains why this proposal should, on its own terms, not be enacted. Use this model prediction: “something that explains why the ban on high-water canoeing should not be lifted, even though the government should not ban activities that harm only willing participants.” (note that this prediction strongly suggests a more refined one: “something that explains how high-water canoeing does harm people who are not willing participants.”) so if we find an answer choice suggesting that canoeing during flood stage harms people other than those who have chosen to canoe, the opponents’ conclusion will be weakened.

Step 4: Evaluate the Choices
(C) offers such a suggestion by stating that police officers, none of whom consented to expose themselves to the dangers of canoeing in high water, were in fact harmed as a result of the existence of such canoeing. (A) tries to provide a “parallel” situation (sailboats on a lake), but we don’t know that the sailboats are banned on the lake on windy days because people who didn’t choose to sail are being harmed when people sail in winds above 50 miles per hour. and just because, as (B) says, other governments have also enacted the bans doesn’t mean that the bans are necessarily reasonable. the opponents might still have a valid argument. (D) offers an irrelevant comparison: that more canoeists drown while the river is at normal levels may simply be due to the fact that there are more canoeists at that time to begin with. that has no bearing on whether canoeing should be banned at high water levels. and (E)might be tempting, but it doesn’t show that the opponents’ proposal to abolish the ban won’t work on its own terms. (E) doesn’t give an example of people who aren’t choosing to go high-water canoeing but who are nonetheless harmed by it. Choice (C) is the correct answer

PS : B

CR : A