Scribd
Upload
28 views4 pages

CSAT Questions

Uploaded by

Aanand Rishabh Daga
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
28 views4 pages

CSAT Questions

Uploaded by

Aanand Rishabh Daga
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

At the start of the 20th century, the Haber-Bosch process revolutionized agriculture by synthesizing

ammonia, a crucial component of fertilizers, from atmospheric nitrogen. While this boosted food
production significantly, it also led to environmental challenges. Over the past century, human-made
nitrogen levels in air, water, and soil have doubled, mainly due to synthetic fertilizers. Excess nitrogen
drives pollution, harming ecosystems and human health. Nutrient run-off creates algal blooms and dead
zones in water bodies like the Gulf of Mexico, while nitrogen compounds in the atmosphere exacerbate
climate change. Ammonia emissions from agriculture combine with vehicle pollution to form harmful
particulates, increasing respiratory illnesses. Efforts like the Colombo Declaration and the "Halve
Nitrogen Waste" campaign aim to mitigate these effects by promoting efficient nitrogen use, organic
farming, and nitrogen-fixing crops, but transitioning away from synthetic fertilizers poses significant
challenges, particularly in developing countries.

1. Which of the following best captures the primary purpose of the passage?

(a) To emphasize the importance of nitrogen for agricultural growth.

(b) To discuss the environmental and health impacts of synthetic fertilizers.

(c) To highlight advancements in synthetic fertilizer production.

(d) To argue against the use of the Haber-Bosch process.

Answer: (b) To discuss the environmental and health impacts of synthetic fertilizers.

Explanation: While the passage does talk about the importance of nitrogen for agricultural growth the
primary intent of the passage is to highlight the environmental impact of synthetic fertilizers on human
health and the environment.

2. Which of the following would NOT be a recommended solution to the nitrogen pollution problem as
described in the passage?

(a) Promoting nitrogen-fixing crops like legumes.

(b) Increasing the efficiency of animal manure usage.

(c) Enhancing reliance on the Haber-Bosch process.

(d) Implementing financial incentives for sustainable farming methods.

Answer: (c) Enhancing reliance on the Haber-Bosch process.

Explanation: Statement (a) is strengthened as there is a direct mention of nitrogen fixing crops in the
passage, Statement (b) strengthens organic farming as mentioned in the passage, Statement (d) directly
strengthens the claims of the author regarding organic farming. However Statement(c) goes against the
solution to the problem as it worsens nitrogen pollution as per the passage.
3. In how many ways can 144 be divided into two parts, such that one part when divided by 5 leaves a
remainder of 4, whereas the other part when divided by 8 leaves a remainder of 2?

(a) 4

(b) 5

(c) 6

(d) 8

Answer: (a) 4

Explanation:

Let us denote the two numbers as 8a +2 and 5b + 4

respectively.

It is given that, 8a + 2 + 5b + 4 = 144

8a + 5b = 138

substituting a = 1, we get b = 26.

Again, we know that successive values of a and b will

change as per the coefficients of b and a respectively.

Applying this, we get the following solutions for a and b

a1 6 11 16

b 26 18 10 2

Therefore, the numbers are 8a + 2 and 5b + 4

i.e, (10, 130), (50, 94), (90, 44) and (130, 14).

Thus, we get a total of 4 ways

4. What is the remainder when 376^2547 is divided by 100?

(a) 76

(b) 24

(c) 12

(d) 56

Answer: (a) 76

Explanation: 376^2547 leaves the last two digits as the remainder when divided by 100.
Last two digits of 376^2547 are same as the last two digits of 76^2547.

76 * 76 ends in 76, that means any higher power of 76 also ends in 76.

The last two digits of 762547 are 76. Hence, the required remainder is 76.

5. Question: Is p divisible by q?

Statement-1: p is divisible by 36 and q is divisible by 3.

Statement-2: p is divisible by 72 and q is not divisible by 6.

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above Question and the Statements?

(a) The Question can be answered by using one of the Statements alone, but cannot be answered using
the other Statement alone.

(b) The Question can be answered by using either Statement alone.

(c) The Question can be answered by using both Statements together, but cannot be answered using
either Statement alone.

(d) The Question cannot be answered even by using both the Statements together.

Answer: (d) The Question cannot be answered even by using both the Statements together.

Explanation:

• Statement-1: p is divisible by 36 and q is divisible by 3.


Since p is divisible by 36, this means p has at least the factors 2^2 and 3^2. On the other hand, q
being divisible by 3 tells us q has at least a factor of 3, but not necessarily any higher powers of 3
or any other factors. This doesn't necessarily mean that p is divisible by q, because the specific
value of q isn't provided.

• Statement-2: p is divisible by 72 and q is not divisible by 6.


Here, p is divisible by 72, which is 2^3 * 3^2. This gives us more information than Statement-1
about the divisibility of p. However, q not being divisible by 6 means that q cannot have both 2
and 3 as factors simultaneously. This still doesn't guarantee divisibility, because we don’t know
the exact value of q. For example, q could be 3, 9, or any other odd factor of 3, which would
affect whether p is divisible by q.

Combining both statements:

• Combining the information from both statements, we still cannot definitively conclude whether
p is divisible by q because the values of p and q are not explicitly specified, and there are
multiple possibilities for q.

Thus, the question cannot be answered even by using both statements together.

You might also like