T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1764.1 | pyramid of chops | HERON::BUCHANAN | The was not found. | Mon Jun 14 1993 08:52 | 13 |
| Take a (big) tetrahedron, and chop it in two, parallel to two opposite
edges of the tetrahedron. The cross-section is a square. The two pieces
that you now have are congruent. From each piece, chop off the two regular
tetrahedral corners (edge length half that of the original tetrahedron).
Then what remains of each piece is a square pyramid.
So T+P+T + T+P+T = a tetrahedron.
Alternatively, stick the two pyramids together, and see that you
have a regular octahedron. Gluing tetrahedra to 4 non-adjacent faces
returns you to the big tetrahedron.
Andrew.
|
1764.2 | SAT mistake? | RANGER::BRADLEY | Chuck Bradley | Mon Jun 14 1993 17:20 | 6 |
|
this sounds vaguely familiar. i think the question was asked on an SAT test,
back about 1978 or 1979. one of the students answered five and had it marked
wrong, but complained and got his score changed. it was in the boston globe,
so probably also in other papers.
|
1764.3 | memories aint deceivin' | AUSSIE::GARSON | nouveau pauvre | Mon Jun 14 1993 19:41 | 6 |
| re .2
Clarke mentions that the printed answer was wrong and that one genius level
student got the "right" answer.
SAT = ?
|
1764.4 | | HANNAH::OSMAN | see HANNAH::IGLOO$:[OSMAN]ERIC.VT240 | Tue Jun 15 1993 13:08 | 6 |
|
We only got our SAT scores, we never got to see which questions we got
wrong. How did that student get the details ?
/Eric
|
1764.5 | I don't know | RANGER::BRADLEY | Chuck Bradley | Tue Jun 15 1993 13:34 | 18 |
|
> We only got our SAT scores, we never got to see which questions we got
> wrong. How did that student get the details ?
i don't know, and i'm not even sure of what i said in .2.
i saw something in the paper, and i also recall hearing about it from
Lynn Yarbrough. maybe he remembers more of the details.
maybe the kid got a 790 and was confident enough that it should have been
an 800 that he sued. it is now possible to get the answers, but for many
years ETS was so closed they could have assigned the scores by a random
number generator. maybe the incident happened after ETS was opened up,
or maybe it was one of the incidents that forced it to open up, or maybe
it was not the SAT at all.
anybody want to do a literature search? NY Times index, Reader's Guide,
some kind of education index. the details would be interesting,
but not completely relevant to this conference.
|
1764.6 | | RUSURE::EDP | Always mount a scratch monkey. | Tue Jun 15 1993 16:28 | 6 |
| Re .4, .5:
It happened after the answers became available.
-- edp
|