Look carefully at the sequence of symbols to find the pattern. <img src="https://cracku.in/media/uploads/Screenshot_21_ilpZSFn.png" /> Which of the following will replace the (?) in the sequence? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Look carefully at the sequence of symbols to find the pattern. Which of the following will replace the (?) in the sequence?

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Which algorithm is used to search a given text for a particular keyword pattern and record the number of times the keyword or pattern is found?....

QA->Find the odd one out in the sequence of numbers.2,5,10,17,26,37,50 ?....

QA->Find the next letter in the sequence A, D, I, P, …… ?....

QA->Externally defined symbols are resolved by:....

QA->The symbols used in assembly language are:....

MCQ->Look carefully at the sequence of symbols to find the pattern.

Which of the following will replace the (?) in the sequence?....

MCQ-> In the following passage, some of the words have been left out. Read the passage carefully and select the correct answer for the given blank out of the four alternatives. That is why publicly invoking these symbols has to be an act of responsible citizenship and not self......(1)........ demagoguery, but the difference can be hard to ........(2)....... The problem with emotive symbols is that ......(3).......they can multiply the force of arguments, they cannot replace the arguments......(4)......... All persuasion harnesses symbols but principled persuasion must also provide arguments that can be .......(5)....... debated.An act of responsible citizenship and not self..............demagoguery
....

MCQ-> In each question below, a group of digits/symbols is given, followed by four combinations of letters numbered (1), (2), (3), and (4). You have to find out which of the combinations (1), (2), (3) and (4) correctly represents the group of digits/symbols based on the following coding system and the conditions those follow and mark the number of that combination as your answer. If none of the four combinations correctly represents the group of digits/symbols, mark (5) i.e.,’None of these’ as the answer Digit/Symbol 5 9 @ © 3 8 1 $ % 4 2 6 * 7 $$\delta$$ # Letter Code B E P A K D F H Q I R J U M V T Conditions (a) If the first unit in the group is an even digit and the last unit is a symbol, both these are to be coded as the code for the symbol. (b) If the first unit in the group is an odd digit and the last unit is an even digit, their codes are to the unchanged. (c) If both the first and the last units in the group are symbols, both these are to be coded as ‘X’.@91$26
....

MCQ-> The following questions relate to a game to be played by you and your friend. The game consists of a 4 x 4 board (see below) where each cell contains a positive integer. You and your friend make moves alternately. A move by any of the players consists of splitting the current board configuration into two equal halves and retaining one of them. In your moves you are allowed to split the board only vertically and to decide to retain either the left or the right half. Your friend, in his/her moves, can split the board only horizontally and can retain either the lower or the upper half. After two moves by each player a single cell will remain which can no longer be split and the number in that cell will be treated as the gain (in rupees) of the person who has started the game. A sample game is shown below. So your gain is Re.1. With the same initial board configuration as above and assuming that you have to make the first move, answer the following questions. Initial Board

After your move (retain left)

After your friends move (retain upper)

After your move (retain right)

After your friends move (retain lower)

If you choose (retain right) (retain left) in your turns, the best move sequence for your friend to reduce your gain to a minimum will be
....

MCQ-> If translated into English, most of the ways economists talk among themselves would sound plausible enough to poets, journalists, businesspeople, and other thoughtful though non-economical folk. Like serious talk anywhere — among boat desingers and baseball fans, say — the talk is hard to follow when one has not made a habit of listening to it for a while. The culture of the conversation makes the words arcane. But the people in the unfamiliar conversation are not Martians. Underneath it all (the economist’s favourite phrase) conversational habits are similar. Economics uses mathematical models and statistical tests and market arguments, all of which look alien to the literary eye. But looked at closely they are not so alien. They may be seen as figures of speech-metaphors, analogies, and appeals to authority.Figures of speech are not mere frills. They think for us. Someone who thinks of a market as an ‘invisible hand’ and the organization of work as a ‘production function’ and his coefficients as being ‘significant’, as an economist does, is giving the language a lot of responsibility. It seems a good idea to look hard at his language.If the economic conversation were found to depend a lot on its verbal forms, this would not mean that economics would be not a science, or just a matter of opinion, or some sort of confidence game. Good poets, though not scientists, are serious thinkers about symbols; good historians, though not scientists, are serious thinkers about data. Good scientists also use language. What is more (though it remains to be shown) they use the cunning of language, without particularly meaning to. The language used is a social object, and using language is a social act. It requires cunning (or, if you prefer, consideration), attention to the other minds present when one speaks.The paying of attention to one’s audience is called ‘rhetoric’, a word that I later exercise hard. One uses rhetoric, of course, to warn of a fire in a theatre or to arouse the xenophobia of the electorate. This sort of yelling is the vulgar meaning of the word, like the president’s ‘heated rhetoric’ in a press conference or the ‘mere rhetoric’ to which our enemies stoop. Since the Greek flame was lit, though, the word has been used also in a broader and more amiable sense, to mean the study of all the ways of accomplishing things with language: inciting a mob to lynch the accused, to be sure, but also persuading readers of a novel that its characters breathe, or bringing scholars to accept the better argument and reject the worse.The question is whether the scholar- who usually fancies himself an announcer of ‘results’ or a stater of ‘conclusions’ free of rhetoric — speaks rhetorically. Does he try to persuade? It would seem so. Language, I just said, is not a solitary accomplishment. The scholar doesn’t speak into the void, or to himself. He speaks to a community of voices. He desires to be heeded, praised, published, imitated, honoured, en-Nobeled. These are the desires. The devices of language are the means. Rhetoric is the proportioning of means to desires in speech.Rhetoric is an economics of language, the study of how scarce means are allocated to the insatiable desires of people to be heard. It seems on the face of it a reasonable hypothesis that economists are like other people in being talkers, who desire listeners whey they go to the library or the laboratory as much as when they go to the office or the polls. The purpose here is to see if this is true, and to see if it is useful: to study the rhetoric of economic scholarship.The subject is scholarship. It is not the economy, or the adequacy of economic theory as a description of the economy, or even mainly the economist’s role in the economy. The subject is the conversation economists have among themselves, for purposes of persuading each other that the interest elasticity of demand for investment is zero or that the money supply is controlled by the Federal Reserve.Unfortunately, though, the conclusions are of more than academic interest. The conversations of classicists or of astronomers rarely affect the lives of other people. Those of economists do so on a large scale. A well known joke describes a May Day parade through Red Square with the usual mass of soldiers, guided missiles, rocket launchers. At last come rank upon rank of people in gray business suits. A bystander asks, “Who are those?” “Aha!” comes the reply, ”those are economists: you have no idea what damage they can do!” Their conversations do it.According to the passage, which of the following is the best set of reasons for which one needs to ‘look hard’ at an economist’s language?A. Economists accomplish a great deal through their language.B. Economics is an opinion-based subject.C. Economics has a great impact on other’s lives.D. Economics is damaging.
....