CAT Mini Mock Test - 3 - CAT MCQ
30 Questions MCQ Test - CAT Mini Mock Test - 3
Direction: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows:
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Q. What is the primary focus of the passage?
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Direction: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows:
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Q. Which of the following statements is NOT supported by the passage?
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Direction: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows:
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Q. According to the passage, the discovery of the relationship between the tree and the ants has led scientists to:
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Direction: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows:
In the heart of the Amazon rainforest, a botanical enigma has piqued the interest of scientists and environmentalists alike. This enigma is the "Devil's Garden," a peculiar patch of land where only one species of tree, Duroia hirsuta, seems to thrive, while all others are conspicuously absent. For years, this anomaly baffled researchers, prompting theories ranging from soil peculiarities to indigenous farming practices. However, recent studies have shed light on a rather astonishing interplay between nature's flora and fauna.
Upon closer examination, scientists discovered that the Duroia hirsuta tree has an unlikely ally: the Myrmelachista schumanni ant. These ants form a mutualistic relationship with the tree, wherein the tree provides nectar from its stems, which is not found in any other species in the area. In return, the ants protect the tree from encroaching plant species by deploying a potent herbicide secreted from their bodies, effectively creating a botanical monoculture around their home.
The discovery of this relationship has profound implications for our understanding of mutualism and its impact on biodiversity. It raises the question of whether human intervention in preserving biodiversity should take into account such complex natural relationships, which can sometimes lead to the dominance of a single species over others in a given area. This phenomenon also highlights the delicate balance ecosystems maintain, which can be easily disrupted by external factors.
The "Devil's Garden" serves as a microcosm of the larger issues facing our planet's biodiversity. As the world grapples with environmental changes and human encroachment, the survival of such unique and intricate ecosystems hangs in the balance. It reminds us that nature's workings are far more complex and interconnected than they appear, and preserving biodiversity requires a deep understanding of these relationships.
Q. The passage suggests that the "Devil's Garden" is significant because:
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question.
The psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and 'anti psychiatrist' Thomas Szasz argued that there was no such thing as mental illness. He believed that mental illnesses were 'problems of living': personal conflicts, bad habits and moral faults. Therefore, mental illness was the sufferer's own personal responsibility. As a consequence, Szasz claimed that psychiatry should be abolished as a medical discipline, since it had nothing to treat. If a person's symptoms had a physiological basis, then they were physical disorders of the brain rather than 'mental' ones.
I personally believe that mental illnesses are mental only in that they are psychiatric. Ordinary understandings of the mind, and what is and isn't part of it, have nothing to do with it. Perception is generally considered to be mental, a part of the mind – yet, while medicine considers deafness and blindness to be disorders of perception, it doesn't class them as mental illnesses. Why? The answer is obvious: because psychiatrists generally aren't the best doctors to treat deafness and blindness.
When people talk about 'the mind' and 'the mental' in psychiatry, my first thought is always 'What exactly do they mean?' A 'mental' illness is just an illness that psychiatry is equipped to deal with. That's determined as much by practical considerations about the skills psychiatrists have to offer, as it is by theoretical or philosophical factors. But this pragmatic approach hides itself behind appeals to 'mental illness'. In many contexts, the term mental tends to bring along inappropriate and stigmatizing connotations – showing that the wrong bridges have been built.
Imagine that you suffer from long-term, chronic pain. You go to the latest in a series of doctors: by this point, and especially if you are a member of a marginalized group (a woman or person of color, say), doctors might have dismissed or disbelieved you; they might have assumed you were exaggerating your pain, or perhaps that you were a hypochondriac. After some tests, and some questions, you're eventually told that your chronic pain is a mental illness, and referred to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist, you are told, will not prescribe drugs or surgery, but will instead prescribe psychotherapy, also known as 'talk therapy', and occasionally, 'mental therapy'.
You might, quite reasonably, think that this doctor disbelieves you too. Perhaps they think that you have a delusion, or that you're lying because of some kind of personality disorder? In mainstream pieces on the topic, being referred to a psychiatrist is seen as tantamount to being disbelieved, dismissed or called a hypochondriac. It's understandable that you might be annoyed for your condition to be branded a 'mental illness'. But what about your doctor – what did they want you to take away from that interaction? It might well be that they absolutely believed that you were in severe, involuntary pain, caused by heightened sensitisation of the peripheral nervous system as a result of 'rewiring'. Pain that results from rewiring of the nervous system is known as 'neoplastic pain', recognised as a highly medically significant category of pain. They don't necessarily think you're lying or delusional. In invoking 'mental illness', what they might have meant is only that it might be best treated by talk therapy, and best managed and understood by a psychiatrist.
Q. Which of the following can be best inferred about Thomas Szasz terming mental illnesses as 'problems of living'?
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question.
The psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and 'anti psychiatrist' Thomas Szasz argued that there was no such thing as mental illness. He believed that mental illnesses were 'problems of living': personal conflicts, bad habits and moral faults. Therefore, mental illness was the sufferer's own personal responsibility. As a consequence, Szasz claimed that psychiatry should be abolished as a medical discipline, since it had nothing to treat. If a person's symptoms had a physiological basis, then they were physical disorders of the brain rather than 'mental' ones.
I personally believe that mental illnesses are mental only in that they are psychiatric. Ordinary understandings of the mind, and what is and isn't part of it, have nothing to do with it. Perception is generally considered to be mental, a part of the mind – yet, while medicine considers deafness and blindness to be disorders of perception, it doesn't class them as mental illnesses. Why? The answer is obvious: because psychiatrists generally aren't the best doctors to treat deafness and blindness.
When people talk about 'the mind' and 'the mental' in psychiatry, my first thought is always 'What exactly do they mean?' A 'mental' illness is just an illness that psychiatry is equipped to deal with. That's determined as much by practical considerations about the skills psychiatrists have to offer, as it is by theoretical or philosophical factors. But this pragmatic approach hides itself behind appeals to 'mental illness'. In many contexts, the term mental tends to bring along inappropriate and stigmatizing connotations – showing that the wrong bridges have been built.
Imagine that you suffer from long-term, chronic pain. You go to the latest in a series of doctors: by this point, and especially if you are a member of a marginalized group (a woman or person of color, say), doctors might have dismissed or disbelieved you; they might have assumed you were exaggerating your pain, or perhaps that you were a hypochondriac. After some tests, and some questions, you're eventually told that your chronic pain is a mental illness, and referred to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist, you are told, will not prescribe drugs or surgery, but will instead prescribe psychotherapy, also known as 'talk therapy', and occasionally, 'mental therapy'.
You might, quite reasonably, think that this doctor disbelieves you too. Perhaps they think that you have a delusion, or that you're lying because of some kind of personality disorder? In mainstream pieces on the topic, being referred to a psychiatrist is seen as tantamount to being disbelieved, dismissed or called a hypochondriac. It's understandable that you might be annoyed for your condition to be branded a 'mental illness'. But what about your doctor – what did they want you to take away from that interaction? It might well be that they absolutely believed that you were in severe, involuntary pain, caused by heightened sensitisation of the peripheral nervous system as a result of 'rewiring'. Pain that results from rewiring of the nervous system is known as 'neoplastic pain', recognised as a highly medically significant category of pain. They don't necessarily think you're lying or delusional. In invoking 'mental illness', what they might have meant is only that it might be best treated by talk therapy, and best managed and understood by a psychiatrist.
Q. In the statement 'mental illnesses are mental only in that they are psychiatric', what is the author trying to imply?
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question.
The psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and 'anti psychiatrist' Thomas Szasz argued that there was no such thing as mental illness. He believed that mental illnesses were 'problems of living': personal conflicts, bad habits and moral faults. Therefore, mental illness was the sufferer's own personal responsibility. As a consequence, Szasz claimed that psychiatry should be abolished as a medical discipline, since it had nothing to treat. If a person's symptoms had a physiological basis, then they were physical disorders of the brain rather than 'mental' ones.
I personally believe that mental illnesses are mental only in that they are psychiatric. Ordinary understandings of the mind, and what is and isn't part of it, have nothing to do with it. Perception is generally considered to be mental, a part of the mind – yet, while medicine considers deafness and blindness to be disorders of perception, it doesn't class them as mental illnesses. Why? The answer is obvious: because psychiatrists generally aren't the best doctors to treat deafness and blindness.
When people talk about 'the mind' and 'the mental' in psychiatry, my first thought is always 'What exactly do they mean?' A 'mental' illness is just an illness that psychiatry is equipped to deal with. That's determined as much by practical considerations about the skills psychiatrists have to offer, as it is by theoretical or philosophical factors. But this pragmatic approach hides itself behind appeals to 'mental illness'. In many contexts, the term mental tends to bring along inappropriate and stigmatizing connotations – showing that the wrong bridges have been built.
Imagine that you suffer from long-term, chronic pain. You go to the latest in a series of doctors: by this point, and especially if you are a member of a marginalized group (a woman or person of color, say), doctors might have dismissed or disbelieved you; they might have assumed you were exaggerating your pain, or perhaps that you were a hypochondriac. After some tests, and some questions, you're eventually told that your chronic pain is a mental illness, and referred to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist, you are told, will not prescribe drugs or surgery, but will instead prescribe psychotherapy, also known as 'talk therapy', and occasionally, 'mental therapy'.
You might, quite reasonably, think that this doctor disbelieves you too. Perhaps they think that you have a delusion, or that you're lying because of some kind of personality disorder? In mainstream pieces on the topic, being referred to a psychiatrist is seen as tantamount to being disbelieved, dismissed or called a hypochondriac. It's understandable that you might be annoyed for your condition to be branded a 'mental illness'. But what about your doctor – what did they want you to take away from that interaction? It might well be that they absolutely believed that you were in severe, involuntary pain, caused by heightened sensitisation of the peripheral nervous system as a result of 'rewiring'. Pain that results from rewiring of the nervous system is known as 'neoplastic pain', recognised as a highly medically significant category of pain. They don't necessarily think you're lying or delusional. In invoking 'mental illness', what they might have meant is only that it might be best treated by talk therapy, and best managed and understood by a psychiatrist.
Q. Which of the following, in context of the passage, would justify terming an illness as 'mental illness'?
Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question.
The psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and 'anti psychiatrist' Thomas Szasz argued that there was no such thing as mental illness. He believed that mental illnesses were 'problems of living': personal conflicts, bad habits and moral faults. Therefore, mental illness was the sufferer's own personal responsibility. As a consequence, Szasz claimed that psychiatry should be abolished as a medical discipline, since it had nothing to treat. If a person's symptoms had a physiological basis, then they were physical disorders of the brain rather than 'mental' ones.
I personally believe that mental illnesses are mental only in that they are psychiatric. Ordinary understandings of the mind, and what is and isn't part of it, have nothing to do with it. Perception is generally considered to be mental, a part of the mind – yet, while medicine considers deafness and blindness to be disorders of perception, it doesn't class them as mental illnesses. Why? The answer is obvious: because psychiatrists generally aren't the best doctors to treat deafness and blindness.
When people talk about 'the mind' and 'the mental' in psychiatry, my first thought is always 'What exactly do they mean?' A 'mental' illness is just an illness that psychiatry is equipped to deal with. That's determined as much by practical considerations about the skills psychiatrists have to offer, as it is by theoretical or philosophical factors. But this pragmatic approach hides itself behind appeals to 'mental illness'. In many contexts, the term mental tends to bring along inappropriate and stigmatizing connotations – showing that the wrong bridges have been built.
Imagine that you suffer from long-term, chronic pain. You go to the latest in a series of doctors: by this point, and especially if you are a member of a marginalized group (a woman or person of color, say), doctors might have dismissed or disbelieved you; they might have assumed you were exaggerating your pain, or perhaps that you were a hypochondriac. After some tests, and some questions, you're eventually told that your chronic pain is a mental illness, and referred to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist, you are told, will not prescribe drugs or surgery, but will instead prescribe psychotherapy, also known as 'talk therapy', and occasionally, 'mental therapy'.
You might, quite reasonably, think that this doctor disbelieves you too. Perhaps they think that you have a delusion, or that you're lying because of some kind of personality disorder? In mainstream pieces on the topic, being referred to a psychiatrist is seen as tantamount to being disbelieved, dismissed or called a hypochondriac. It's understandable that you might be annoyed for your condition to be branded a 'mental illness'. But what about your doctor – what did they want you to take away from that interaction? It might well be that they absolutely believed that you were in severe, involuntary pain, caused by heightened sensitisation of the peripheral nervous system as a result of 'rewiring'. Pain that results from rewiring of the nervous system is known as 'neoplastic pain', recognised as a highly medically significant category of pain. They don't necessarily think you're lying or delusional. In invoking 'mental illness', what they might have meant is only that it might be best treated by talk therapy, and best managed and understood by a psychiatrist.
Q. Which of the following statements is the author most likely to disagree with?
Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
It is important to examine the attitudes towards women before divulging into the roles in which they existed. While the overall religious and societal context of late antiquity has been discussed, the societal perception of the concept of womanhood or femininity ought to be discussed in its own right. One ought to look for sentiments regarding women held throughout the empire by investigating their portrayal in various historian accounts as well as ecclesiastical writings.
Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
We seem to have something within us which is not entirely a property of this world. If we were entirely of a longing of this world, sunk in this material world and exhausted completely in the phenomena that are visible, it would be impossible for us to know that there is any kind of limitation at all. We would never be unhappy for any reason. Unhappiness of every kind, sorrow of any character is an indication that there is something in the human individual which is not satisfied with anything in this world, and this endowment, this impulse arising from the human being, cannot be considered as a property of this world because anything that is an integral part of this visible world only, this world which is limited so much, cannot raise this question. A thing that is involved in the world cannot raise a question about the world.
Which of the following is the ODD ONE OUT? [TITA]
1. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle taught that living a virtuous life was the key to happiness.
2. The Indian philosophy of Buddhism teaches that the path to happiness lies in the elimination of desire and the achievement of enlightenment.
3. The German philosopher Immanuel Kant believed that morality is based on reason and that we should always act in a way that treats others as ends in themselves.
4. The 17th-century French philosopher Rene Descartes is known for his famous statement "I think, therefore I am", which established the concept of mind-body dualism.
5. The Chinese philosopher Confucius emphasized the importance of social harmony and moral behavior in achieving happiness.
Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below.
Eight persons are from the same family with three generations. The number of males is two more than the number of females. W is the brother of T, who is the daughter-in-law of U. F is the brother-in-law of W and father of D. U is the father of F and has only one child. P is the grandmother of O, who is not a female. K is the father of T whereas P is not the mother-in-law of T, who has two children.
Q. If U and P are siblings, then how is U related to K?
Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below.
Eight persons are from the same family with three generations. The number of males is two more than the number of females. W is the brother of T, who is the daughter-in-law of U. F is the brother-in-law of W and father of D. U is the father of F and has only one child. P is the grandmother of O, who is not a female. K is the father of T whereas P is not the mother-in-law of T, who has two children.
Q. How is D related to W?
Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below.
Eight persons are from the same family with three generations. The number of males is two more than the number of females. W is the brother of T, who is the daughter-in-law of U. F is the brother-in-law of W and father of D. U is the father of F and has only one child. P is the grandmother of O, who is not a female. K is the father of T whereas P is not the mother-in-law of T, who has two children.
Q. Who among the following person is the grandson of U?
Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below.
Eight persons are from the same family with three generations. The number of males is two more than the number of females. W is the brother of T, who is the daughter-in-law of U. F is the brother-in-law of W and father of D. U is the father of F and has only one child. P is the grandmother of O, who is not a female. K is the father of T whereas P is not the mother-in-law of T, who has two children.
Q. If U and P are siblings, then how is U related to K?
A person invests an amount of Rs. 50000 in company Y in 2023 for 1 year. After one year, from the total amount received, he bought a Television worth of Rs. 20000 and invested the remaining amount in company X for one year. Find the interest received by him from the investment.
In 2024, an amount of 1 Lac is invested in company X for 1 year and after that the total amount received is invested in company Y for 1 year in 2025. Find the total amount received after these two years. (The interest rate of 2025 for Y is the same as 2024)
In 2023, a part of Rs. 45,000 is invested in company X and the rest was invested in company Y for 1 year. If the total interest received is Rs. 3100, then what was the amount invested in company X?
Two different amounts in the ratio 8 : 15 are invested in X and Y respectively in 2022. Then find the ratio of the amount received after 1 year for X to Y.
A person invested Rs. 12,500 in company X in the year 2020 for 1 year. If he had invested the same amount in company Y for one year in 2020, how much less amount would he earn than?
Four bells ring simultaneously at starting and an interval of 6 sec, 12 sec, 15 sec and 20 sec respectively. How many times they ring together in 2 hours?
Directions for Question: A set of 10 pipes (set X) can fill 70% of a tank in 7 minutes. Another set of 5 pipes (set Y) fills 3/8 of the tank in 3 minutes. A third set of 8 pipes (set Z) can empty 5/10 of the tank in 10 minutes.
Q. If one pipe is added for set X and set Y and set Z ' s capacity is increased by 20% of its original value and all the taps are opened at 2.58 p.m., then at what time does the tank gets filled? (If if is initially empty).
In a company, 20% of the employees work in the manufacturing department. If the total salary obtained by all the manufacturing employees is one-sixth of the total salary obtained by all the employees in the company, then the ratio of the average salary obtained by the manufacturing employees to the average salary obtained by the nonmanufacturing employees is
The average height of 22 toddlers increases by 2 inches when two of them leave this group. If the average height of these two toddlers is one-third the average height of the original 22, then the average height, in inches, of the remaining 20 toddlers is
It takes eight hours for a 600 km journey, if 120 km is done by train and the rest by car. It takes 20 minutes more, if 200 km is done by train and the rest by car. What is the ratio of the speed of the train to that of the car?
PQRS is a circle and circles are drawn with PO, QO, RO and SO as diameters. Areas A and B are marked. A/B is equal to:
How many 3 digit numbers can be formed from the digits 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9 which are divisible by 5 and none of the digits is repeated?
Important Questions for CAT Mini Mock Test - 3
CAT Mini Mock Test - 3 MCQs with Answers
Online Tests for CAT Mini Mock Test - 3
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
