0
Q:

# The food processing industry was touted to be a sunrise industry for India some years ago and, on the face of it , there was little reason to doubt thatConclusions: I. India has an advantage in food processing because of the varied agro-climatic conditions and availabilty of raw materials.II. Food processing is one of the basic industries which suports our lives.

 A) If only conclusion I follows B) If only conclusion II follows C) If neither I nor II follows D) If both I and II follow

Answer:   C) If neither I nor II follows

Explanation:

Which factors influence the food processing industry cannot be determined from the statement. Hence I does not follow. II does not follow because the statement doesn't give any clue about the industry's centrality to our lives.

Q:

Assuming the given statements to be true, find which of the two conclusions A and B given below is/are definitely true.

Statements: C < T < L= P > Q,  N > C > Y

Conclusions:   A. P > Y       B. Y < P

 A) only conclusion B is true. B) only conclusion A is true. C) neither conclusion I nor II is true. D) either conclusion I or II is true.

Explanation:

From given statements, we can conclude that

N > C < T < L= P > Q  .....(1)

Here given that C > Y but in eq(1) we got that C < T < T <= P => Y is definitely less than P.

So only conclusion B is True.

1 18
Q:

Q : Which train did Harish catch to go to office ?

Statements :

A. Harish missed his usual train of 4.15 p.m. A train comes in every 15 minutes.

B. Harish did not catch the 4.45 p.m. train or any train after that time.

 A) If statement B alone is sufficient but statement A alone is not sufficient. B) If statement A alone is sufficient but statement B alone is not sufficient. C) If both statement together are sufficient, but neither statement alone is sufficient. D) If statement A and B together are not sufficient.

Answer & Explanation Answer: D) If statement A and B together are not sufficient.

Explanation:

From both statements we cannot conclude the train catched by Harish

Since he missed at 4.15 and train coes at 4.30, 4.45, 5.00,...

But in B given that he didn't catch the train at 4.45 and after that.

So both statements A & B together are not sufficient to answer the question.

1 9
Q:

What is the value of KL ?

Statement A: $\inline \fn_jvn K^{2}$ = 4.
Statement B: L = 0.

 A) Only A is sufficient B) Only B is sufficient C) Both (A) and (B) are sufficient D) None of the above

Explanation:

From statement B,

As the value of L = 0, the value of KL = 0.

Hence only statement B is sufficient.

3 73
Q:

How long will it take for two pipes A and B to fill an empty cistern if they worked alternately for an hour each ?

A. Working alone, Pipe A can fill the cistern in 40 hours
B. Pipe B is one third as efficient as Pipe A

 A) Only A is sufficient B) Only B is sufficient C) Both (A) and (B) are sufficient D) None

Explanation:

From statement A, we know that Pipe A can fill the tank in 40 hours. However, this information is not sufficient as we do not have the data for Pipe B. Hence, statement A alone cannot answer the given question.

From statement B, we know that Pipe B is one third as efficient as pipe A. However, we do not know the rate at which Pipe A fills the tank. Hence, we will not be able to find the rate at which Pipe B fills the cistern. Therefore, statement B alone is not sufficient to answer the question.

Now, if we combine the two statements, we know that Pipe A take 40 hours to fill the cistern.
Pipe B takes 120 hours to fill the cistern.

If they worked alternately, then either Pipe A could have started the cycle or Pipe B could have started the cycle.

If Pipe A started the sequence of filling alternately, then at the end of two hours, the two pipes together would have filled 1/40 + 1/120 = 1/30  th of the tank in an hour. Or the cistern will fill in 30 hours.

If Pipe B started the sequence, then at the end of 2 hours, the two pipes together would have filled 1/120 + 1/40 = 1/30 th of the tank in an hour. Or the cistern will fill in 30 hours.

As the answer obtained irrespective of which pipe started the sequence is the same, the correct answer is (3) - i.e., both the statement are sufficient to answer the question.

3 76
Q:

Statement :

The byproducts obtained from animals such as hairs, skins, horns, etc. contain at least 45 per cent food protein. Indian scientists have developed methods to segregate 50 per cent of this protein. They have used an enzyme developed in Russia for destruction of soya-proteins.

Conclusions:

A. Indian scientists cannot develop enzymes.

B. If a suitable method involving less cost is developed then many more food protein would be obtained.

 A) Only A follows B) Only B follows C) Neither A nor B follows D) Both A & B follows

Explanation:

There is no indication that Indian scientists are incapable of developing enzymes. There could be any number of reasons why Indian scientists used Russian enzymes.

So conclusion A does not follow.

In addition, cost is not discussed in the passage at all. There is no mention of a correlation between cost and extraction of proteins.

Thus, conclusion B does not follow either.