Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
24 Jun 2023, 14:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
"accumulation of natural precipitation on land" -> This means in no way FRESHWATER CAN BE DIFFERENT FROM SAY oceanic water.. i.e there is no dry land
16 Aug 2023, 09:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
B. If 10% or more of a planet's total mass is water, there can be no dry land on that planet.
C. If 10% or more of a planet's total mass is water, there can be little phosphorus on that planet.
I feel the logic used to deduce both B & C is quite similar, then how can we prefer one over the other?
B. There are two reasons why accumulation on NP on land not possible -> Either NP not possible on such planets or there is no land available for accumulation of NP. Therefore, there CAN be no dry land on planets with >10% Water Mass.
C. There are two reasons why planets with no Fresh Water are unlikely to have good amount of P in absorbable form -> Either little P is present in absorbable form OR little P is present to start with. Therefore, there CAN be little P present on planets with >10% Water Mass,
Can someone please point out the flaw in my reasoning? Based on the above logic, I find both B & C fine.
Thanks
C. If 10% or more of a planet's total mass is water, there can be little phosphorus on that planet.
I feel the logic used to deduce both B & C is quite similar, then how can we prefer one over the other?
B. There are two reasons why accumulation on NP on land not possible -> Either NP not possible on such planets or there is no land available for accumulation of NP. Therefore, there CAN be no dry land on planets with >10% Water Mass.
C. There are two reasons why planets with no Fresh Water are unlikely to have good amount of P in absorbable form -> Either little P is present in absorbable form OR little P is present to start with. Therefore, there CAN be little P present on planets with >10% Water Mass,
Can someone please point out the flaw in my reasoning? Based on the above logic, I find both B & C fine.
Thanks
07 Nov 2024, 07:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!
Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).
Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).
Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
