So, now if we consider period from 1600 onwards, the same logic will apply as the logic applied in case of 100 years and 1800 A.D.
The more you increase the average life, the more back in the time we'll need to go because in case of higher average life, we'll have more older hotels still in existence.
Thanks for the analysis.+1
I got your analogy clearly but still having some confusion on the above part...it seems to me that we're here applying some hard fast rule in order to make option D write.The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
- how does it say something like in your analogy only those books of X are preserved now which were his best and the rest of the books were actually discarded
...NOT able to relate these two parts.
Option D could also mean that most of the pre-1930 hotels exist today because of having superior quality of original carpentry...!
Please help. I'm really having a difficult shot to understand it.
Ok. Let me use some numbers here.
Suppose there are 1000 hotels that were created before 1930 and 1000 hotels that were created after 1930.
For the hotels created before 1930,
A1:Quality of 300 hotels = 100
A2: Quality of 400 hotels = 200
A3: Quality of 300 hotels = 300
Average quality = 200
For the hotels created after 1930,
B1: Quality of 300 hotels = 100
B2: Quality of 400 hotels = 200
B3: Quality of 300 hotels = 300
Average quality = 200
So, average quality for hotels from both period is same.
Now, let's bring option D into the picture.The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished
Now, tell me of hotels created before 1930, which hotels are more likely to exist now. A3? Right. After that? A2?
So, now let's suppose currently we have the following pre-1930 hotels left
A1: 150 (half of them got demolished)
A2: 300 (25% of them got demolished)
A3: 300 (None of them got demolished)
Average quality now = 2.2
For hotels built after 1930
B1: 240 (20% of them got demolished) (Since these hotels are built after 1930 and are newer than those built before 1930, the ratio of hotels that got demolished will be lower)
B2: 360 (10% of them got demolished)
B3: 300 (None of them got demolished)
Average quality now: 2.06
So, even though initial quality is same, because of option D, you see final quality of pre-1930 better than post-1930 hotels.
Just to emphasize, I did not chose these number to make option D correct; I chose them out of logic.
Let me know if it addresses your doubts.
Thanks for your further clarification.
So,here the caveat is NOT ALL the pre-1930 hotels are of same quality. Right?
If we presume this then only the above logic logic holds I think. Let me know whether I got it right?
And can you please share some hard OG questions on this concept? It'd have been much helpful then to implement the logic and understand whether it's clear!