Nghiệm của phương trình ${\log }_2\left(3x-8\right)=2$ là

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: The word “accounts” is closest in meaning to   __________    

Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “The natural History of Selboure” (1786 ), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five–never four, never six-caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species–as in the case of the eggs–or survival as individuals-as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small–not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.              

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: The word “surreptitiously” is closest in meaning to 

Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “The natural History of Selboure” (1786 ), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five–never four, never six-caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species–as in the case of the eggs–or survival as individuals-as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small–not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.              

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: The word “odd” refers to which of the following?      

Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “The natural History of Selboure” (1786 ), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five–never four, never six-caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species–as in the case of the eggs–or survival as individuals-as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small–not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.              

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: What is the main idea of this passage?      

Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “The natural History of Selboure” (1786 ), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five–never four, never six-caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species–as in the case of the eggs–or survival as individuals-as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small–not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.                  

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: Why does the author refer to Gilbert White's book in line 2?        

 Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “The natural History of Selboure” (1786 ), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five–never four, never six-caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species–as in the case of the eggs–or survival as individuals-as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small–not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.             

 Question: Why does the author refer to Gilbert White's book in line 2?    

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: How would the author probably characterize the people who are mentioned in the first line of the second paragraph?

Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “The natural History of Selboure” (1786 ), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five–never four, never six-caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species–as in the case of the eggs–or survival as individuals-as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small–not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.              

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Question: What is the main idea of this passage?     

Until recently, most American entrepreneurs were men. Discrimination against women in business, the demands of caring for families, and lack of business training had kept the number of women entrepreneurs small. Now, however, businesses owned by women account for more than $40 billion in annual revenues, and this figure is likely to continue rising throughout the 1990s. As Carolyn Doppelt Gray, an official of the Small Business Administration, has noted, "The 1970s was the decade of women entering management, and the 1980s turned out to be the decade of the woman entrepreneur". What are some of the factors behind this trend? For one thing, as more women earn advanced degrees in business and enter the corporate world, they are finding obstacles. Women are still excluded from most executive suites. Charlotte Taylor, a management consultant, had noted, "In the 1970s women believed if they got an MBA and worked hard they could become chairman of the board. Now they've found out that isn't going to happen, so they go out on their own". In the past, most women entrepreneurs worked in "women's" fields: cosmetics and clothing, for example. But this is changing. Consider ASK Computer Systems, a $22-million-a-year computer software business. It was founded in 1973 by Sandra Kurtzig, who was then a housewife with degrees in math and engineering. When Kurtzig founded the business, her first product was software that let weekly newspapers keep tabs on their newspaper carriers-and her office was a bedroom at home, with a shoebox under the bed to hold the company's cash. After she succeeded with the newspaper software system, she hired several bright computer-science graduates to develop additional programs. When these were marketed and sold, ASK began to grow. It now has 200 employees, and Sandra Kurtzig owns $66.9 million of stock. Of course, many women who start their own businesses fail, just as men often do. They still face hurdles in the business world, especially problems in raising money; the banking and finance world is still dominated by men, and old attitudes die hard. Most businesses owned by women are still quite small. But the situation is changing; there are likely to be many more Sandra Kurtzigs in the years ahead.      

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Scientists have discovered the bones of what may be the largest meat-eating dinosaur ever to walk the earth. The discovery was made by a team of researchers from Argentina and North America in Patagonia, a desert on the eastern slopes of the Andes in South America. Besides the interesting fact that the dinosaur was huge and horrifying, it is even more astounding that the bones of a number of the dinosaurs were found together. This discovery challenges the prior theory that the biggest meat-eaters lived as loners and instead indicates that they may have lived and hunted in packs. The Tyrannosaurus Rex lived in North America and was believed to hunt and live alone. The newly discovered meat-eater appears to be related to the Giganotosaurus family, being as closely related to it as a fox would be to a dog. It is actually not of the same family at all as the Tyrannosaurus Rex, being as different from it as a cat is from a dog. The fossilized remains indicate that the animals lived about 100 million years ago. With needle-shaped noses and razor sharp teeth, they were larger than the Tyrannosaurus Rex, although their legs were slightly shorter, and their jaws were designed to be better able to dissect their prey quickly and precisely.  

Question: The word horrifying in the first paragraph is closest in meaning to ________.         

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Scientists have discovered the bones of what may be the largest meat-eating dinosaur ever to walk the earth. The discovery was made by a team of researchers from Argentina and North America in Patagonia, a desert on the eastern slopes of the Andes in South America. Besides the interesting fact that the dinosaur was huge and horrifying, it is even more astounding that the bones of a number of the dinosaurs were found together. This discovery challenges the prior theory that the biggest meat-eaters lived as loners and instead indicates that they may have lived and hunted in packs. The Tyrannosaurus Rex lived in North America and was believed to hunt and live alone. The newly discovered meat-eater appears to be related to the Giganotosaurus family, being as closely related to it as a fox would be to a dog. It is actually not of the same family at all as the Tyrannosaurus Rex, being as different from it as a cat is from a dog. The fossilized remains indicate that the animals lived about 100 million years ago. With needle-shaped noses and razor sharp teeth, they were larger than the Tyrannosaurus Rex, although their legs were slightly shorter, and their jaws were designed to be better able to dissect their prey quickly and precisely.  

Question: The author states that the newly discovered dinosaur remains are evidence that it was the largest ________.         

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions:

Scientists have discovered the bones of what may be the largest meat-eating dinosaur ever to walk the earth. The discovery was made by a team of researchers from Argentina and North America in Patagonia, a desert on the eastern slopes of the Andes in South America. Besides the interesting fact that the dinosaur was huge and horrifying, it is even more astounding that the bones of a number of the dinosaurs were found together. This discovery challenges the prior theory that the biggest meat-eaters lived as loners and instead indicates that they may have lived and hunted in packs. The Tyrannosaurus Rex lived in North America and was believed to hunt and live alone. The newly discovered meat-eater appears to be related to the Giganotosaurus family, being as closely related to it as a fox would be to a dog. It is actually not of the same family at all as the Tyrannosaurus Rex, being as different from it as a cat is from a dog. The fossilized remains indicate that the animals lived about 100 million years ago. With needle-shaped noses and razor sharp teeth, they were larger than the Tyrannosaurus Rex, although their legs were slightly shorter, and their jaws were designed to be better able to dissect their prey quickly and precisely.

Question: The author implies that the most interesting fact about the find is that this dinosaur ________.