1.3cm. The thickness of the pack has nothing to to with what cards are in it. The card deck would be 1.2cm assuming it was 52 cards before removing the aces.
well a "deck" is 52 cards conventionally, but "pack" seems to imply the container. (You wouldn't call 20 cigarettes loose on a table a "pack" most likely). If that is in fact the author's intention then the pack would still be 1.3cm, but otherwise yes 1.2cm makes sense to me too
if you are taking the view when it's sideways that means it's the length of the cards.. so if you take out 4 cards that doesn't change the length of the cards. so the amswer is the same. 1.3cm
It clearly states a "pack" of cards. You have to critically analyze no matter how many cards you take out the pack will stay the same. If you want to learn how to critically think you have to analyze then porduce an answer off of pure evidence and reasoning. It's the only right answer because even if they didn't mean it that way that's what it states so that's that and they heave the wrong answer for there own question.
Would not a pack of cards refer to a complete pack one having all avaliable cards ie the jokers and not nessarely the containter? for example a pack of wolvies is all the wolvies that belong to the pack and not the forest there in LOL
14 comments:
Assuming that there are 52 cards in the deck then the answer would be:
(1 - 4/52)*1,3 = 1,2
Depending on how you did it.
I got the same answer by taking what is know. And assuming 52 cards in the deck.
(1.3/52)*4=0.1 and since this value if for all the ace's you take 1.3 - 0.1= 1.2.
1.3cm. The thickness of the pack has nothing to to with what cards are in it. The card deck would be 1.2cm assuming it was 52 cards before removing the aces.
I agree with the 1,2cm answers, but if the pack also contains two Jokers, then there would be 54 cards in the deck, minus the 4 Aces:
48 / 54 * 1,3 = 1.1556 cm
(1.3/52)*48=1.2
well a "deck" is 52 cards conventionally, but "pack" seems to imply the container. (You wouldn't call 20 cigarettes loose on a table a "pack" most likely). If that is in fact the author's intention then the pack would still be 1.3cm, but otherwise yes 1.2cm makes sense to me too
I agree sir, I didn't think that way..!
if you are taking the view when it's sideways that means it's the length of the cards.. so if you take out 4 cards that doesn't change the length of the cards. so the amswer is the same. 1.3cm
@danielle: Which pack of cards is 1.3 cm long?
I agree with 1.2 cm.
It clearly states a "pack" of cards. You have to critically analyze no matter how many cards you take out the pack will stay the same. If you want to learn how to critically think you have to analyze then porduce an answer off of pure evidence and reasoning. It's the only right answer because even if they didn't mean it that way that's what it states so that's that and they heave the wrong answer for there own question.
Would not a pack of cards refer to a complete pack one having all avaliable cards ie the jokers and not nessarely the containter? for example a pack of wolvies is all the wolvies that belong to the pack and not the forest there in LOL
its not clear if the view is horizontally sideways or vertically fuckways..no answer..
if sideways=thickness.
deck without aces assuming no jokers is 1.2cm
or deck without aces, with jokers is 1.2037
There is a big ambiguity in the question....! So its not possible to give a unique answer until this question is changed.
Post a Comment