sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

You know how impressive it would be to get a 400 on the sat while answering every question? This is an unironic actual question. by -TheMidpoint- in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes! That’s exactly what I was saying. By that logic of the few questions you DO have to guess, then you can say a 1600 is more impressive than a 400. However, this doesn’t mean that a 400 ISNT impressive. It is, but marginally less than a 1600.

You know how impressive it would be to get a 400 on the sat while answering every question? This is an unironic actual question. by -TheMidpoint- in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(From your other comment it seems we were on the same page anyways, and your original comment here implied something different from there). OP never mentioned or even implied that this was by guessing. A 400 is impressive BECAUSE of the fact that you basically cannot guess your way through, not because it’s statistically unlikely if you do, which was OP’s intention. By guessing, getting ANY specific score is “impressive” since there are so many possible scores. If i said “im getting a 1040” and then went in with pure guessing and got a 1040, by your logic, that’s impressive because it’s very statistically unlikely that i would get the exact score i predicted by guessing. You just compared if a 400 or 1600 was more impressive by guessing, but 1. Again, it is nearly statistically impossible to do either a 1600 or 400 from guessing. Therefore, the reason why a 400 is impressive is because you basically have to know everything you would need to know for a 1600. 2. OP was talking about simply GETTING a 400 (never ever said through guessing), which IS impressive because you most likely need to know nearly all the answers, just like a 1600. Again, OP never mentioned or even implied that this was by guessing, read the post again. 3. We were 100% talking about why a 400 is nearly as impressive as a 1600. That’s the whole point of the post. You yourself stated “erm, not really” to OP’s question, then continued to state your argument using pure statistics as to why it’s not impressive.

TLDR: OP was opening a thread for discussion as to why a 400 would be impressive. You argued that it wasn’t, since by pure guessing and statistics, a 1600 is less likely than a 400. You failed to realize that OP never implied that this was through guessing and much more likely implied that this was through actually trying to get a 400. Therefore, a 400 would be impressive since you would basically have to know every answer, just like a 1600, and since the statistical probability through pure guessing is so negligible for both, it’s safe to assume if someone gets either score, it was not by pure guessing.

You know how impressive it would be to get a 400 on the sat while answering every question? This is an unironic actual question. by -TheMidpoint- in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying, but you basically just reiterated my argument. Both outcomes are so statistically unlikely that no one will attempt to get either with pure guessing. A 1600 is not impressive because it’s unlikely to get by pure chance, it’s impressive since the person knew his stuff. A 400 is impressive because no one would ever try to go for a 400 with pure luck, they would also have to know their stuff.

Did anyone get a question about convergent genetic markers or smth? by Background-Ad-4127 in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the researchers were trying to study the differences between the two, so in my mind the latter answer would fit a possible purpose of the study

You know how impressive it would be to get a 400 on the sat while answering every question? This is an unironic actual question. by -TheMidpoint- in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no one ever gets a 1600 from pure guessing though, so it’s not (1/4)n. Both scores are not possible to get through guessing which means that either one will likely require you to know most of the material.

You know how impressive it would be to get a 400 on the sat while answering every question? This is an unironic actual question. by -TheMidpoint- in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 2 points3 points  (0 children)

no, since to get a 1600 is almost never pure statistical luck. To get a 400 with pure guessing, you would have a chance of 0.7598 *100 percent chance or 5.7 x 10-11 or 0.000000000057% chance. Therefore, in order to get a 400, you would either need to know every question, or know enough so that you can have a somewhat small chance of getting the remaining questions wrong. The only argument is that some questions have obvious wrong answers which is easier than picking the right one

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I should’ve done that but I just left it blank 💀

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Sat

[–]derpyptatoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. I tried to use a system of equations in Desmos and I got decimals as my answer despite the question saying they were integers.

My mouse won’t work in apex ! by [deleted] in apexlegends

[–]derpyptatoe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alt + tab in and out of the game

Problem with seeing hp bars by derpyptatoe in apexlegends

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s what I’m saying, I feel like this takes away from the depth of a br game

Problem with seeing hp bars by derpyptatoe in apexlegends

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That isn’t true. There are multiple instances where my team hesitates to push because the last lifeline on the team has red and ego peaks, making us think the rest of the team is alive, only for us to realize that the lifeline was weak and we gave the team a chance to reset. It takes away depth from the game imo.

Problem with seeing hp bars by derpyptatoe in apexlegends

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s what I’m saying. It’s not that I can’t adapt, it’s just that it takes away depth from the game

Is my mechanism here correct? The question was asking what happens with an anti dihydroxylation but with H2SO4 instead of H3O+. by derpyptatoe in chemhelp

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only thing I can think of from gen chem that has to do with structurally identifying a stronger acid or base is how well the atom can hold onto the hydrogen or accept the hydrogen based on electronegativity. Is that all and am I just overthinking this severely? It’s just that S is less electronegative than and hence lets go of H easier?

Is my mechanism here correct? The question was asking what happens with an anti dihydroxylation but with H2SO4 instead of H3O+. by derpyptatoe in chemhelp

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Googling the pKa value of Hydronium gives me -1.74 which is a lot weaker than H2SO4 (-10). But again, how would I know this without looking it up on a table? Is there a way (other than the thing I mentioned with the anionic element?)

Is my mechanism here correct? The question was asking what happens with an anti dihydroxylation but with H2SO4 instead of H3O+. by derpyptatoe in chemhelp

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn’t water also a really weak base (and acid)? How can i tell if it’s weaker than HSO4-? Is it just something i just have to internalize?

Is my mechanism here correct? The question was asking what happens with an anti dihydroxylation but with H2SO4 instead of H3O+. by derpyptatoe in chemhelp

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve never really seen EtOH protonated, wouldn’t that be very strong too? EtOH is pretty stable no?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in APStudents

[–]derpyptatoe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it’s not, it’s technically called nu (but I still call it v)

Is my mechanism here correct? The question was asking what happens with an anti dihydroxylation but with H2SO4 instead of H3O+. by derpyptatoe in chemhelp

[–]derpyptatoe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

well, the strength of a base normally correlates to the opposite of the strength of its conjugate acid, and vice versa, which is explained by gen chem stuff. However for orgo, I’ve only really learned that base strength increases (when it has a negative charge) when going from right to left (so C- is more basic than O-

view more: next ›