If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Want to work for Williams F1? Then try this simple maths test. Difficulty: No calculators   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 138
    More: Interesting, Williams F1, square roots, Olds College, complex question, decimals, failure rate, practical tests, logs  
•       •       •

10962 clicks; posted to Geek » on 28 Oct 2012 at 6:35 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



138 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-28 08:27:35 PM
100% correct in 64 seconds. Next.
 
2012-10-28 08:31:19 PM

Abner Doon: The log stuff is pretty easy. Just remember log (a*b) = log a + log b and log(a/b) = log a - log b

So the first one, log 40 is cake because thats log (4*10) = log 4 (which is given) + log 10. Since it's log base 10, log 10 = 1.

The second one is cuter, log (.12) = log(12/100) = log 12 - log 100 = log (3*4) - log 100 = log 3 + log 4 - log 100.

The rest is just simple arithmatic to get the actual numbers.


Thank you for explaining logs; it was the only part of the test that I looked at and went "yeah, I have no recollection on how to do that from high school". I got all the other questions right by doing them in my head (though I did check my math on paper for a few of them to make sure I didn't bungle it).
 
2012-10-28 08:34:29 PM

ChubbyTiger: Like everyone else, incredibly simple except for the logs, which I haven't seen in 20+ yrs. I have to wonder why they would care about logs.


They're not looking for people who can manipulate logarithms, they're looking for people who can think in "log-space", comprehending the idea of multiplicative distance rather than simple linear distance. Most of physics and engineering assumes mastery of log-space as a base-level expectation for participation.
 
2012-10-28 08:35:31 PM
they can't spell "math" either.
 
2012-10-28 08:37:47 PM
Meanwhile, I'm over hear measuring the length and diameter of the drum in my old washing machine to find out what the volume was in order to get a comparably sized new machine

// couldn't find the damn specs anywhere

// Turns out, you can't compare volume to volume on top loaders vs front loaders because though the volume is the same, the useable capacity is lower due to the way they wash clothing. End result, I have to wash my comforters at a laundry now :( ... math == pass, mechanical engineering == fail.

// programmer

// pi × r^2 × h
 
2012-10-28 08:43:21 PM
I got 81 on the algebra one, but now I see what I did wrong. I missed the logs because I never had those in school. Otherwise, I did them in my head and got all the others correct.
 
2012-10-28 08:45:17 PM
i can do all of them except the square root of 7 and the logs without a calculator.

after seeing this im surprised that their applicants cant do it. i was expecting much harder questions.
 
2012-10-28 09:00:11 PM

KerwoodDerby: They're not looking for people who can manipulate logarithms, they're looking for people who can think in "log-space", comprehending the idea of multiplicative distance rather than simple linear distance. Most of physics and engineering assumes mastery of log-space as a base-level expectation for participation.


I disagree. They are looking for people who know how to break up problems the same way you would needed to if you were using a slide rule from 60 years ago when the test was made. You can find high school math books from that era that don't cover decimals very well because fractions were assumed to be easier to work with.
 
2012-10-28 09:02:46 PM
I got them all except this one.

2 + 3 = ?
 
2012-10-28 09:05:05 PM

The Flexecutioner: i can do all of them except the square root of 7 and the logs without a calculator.

after seeing this im surprised that their applicants cant do it. i was expecting much harder questions.


it's 7 squared, not square root
 
2012-10-28 09:06:02 PM
Am I the only one that doesn't use math enough to do this quickly (had to write out the long division, multiplication, and 2nd log one), or did people miss the part where you have 2 minutes to complete 15 questions?  I would have needed at least 2:30 to do it the first time.
 
2012-10-28 09:10:24 PM

redTiburon: they can't spell "math" either.


Maths is the correct abbreviation in English. Math is the correct abbreviation in American English. The article is from a British newspaper about a story from Britain therefore English is the correct language to use and not American English.

Back to the article I'm not surprised as apprenticeships are normally for people who leave school at 16 because they don't fit into academic education. If they had the raw ability to do these maths problems in their heads they should be doing post 16 education in one of the alphabet soup qualifications (A levels, NVQs, GNVQ's, BTecs, HND's etc)
 
2012-10-28 09:14:45 PM

Abner Doon: The log stuff is pretty easy. Just remember log (a*b) = log a + log b and log(a/b) = log a - log b

So the first one, log 40 is cake because thats log (4*10) = log 4 (which is given) + log 10. Since it's log base 10, log 10 = 1.

The second one is cuter, log (.12) = log(12/100) = log 12 - log 100 = log (3*4) - log 100 = log 3 + log 4 - log 100.


What the farking fark?
 
2012-10-28 09:15:36 PM
I missed 4 (couldn't do in head)
and 9 and 10 because didn't know what pc meant.
 
2012-10-28 09:16:30 PM

Cluckity: I got them all except this one.

2 + 3 = ?


did you notice which question number it was? =3
 
2012-10-28 09:17:00 PM

KerwoodDerby: ChubbyTiger: Like everyone else, incredibly simple except for the logs, which I haven't seen in 20+ yrs. I have to wonder why they would care about logs.

They're not looking for people who can manipulate logarithms, they're looking for people who can think in "log-space", comprehending the idea of multiplicative distance rather than simple linear distance. Most of physics and engineering assumes mastery of log-space as a base-level expectation for participation.


Heck, even birds can work out such things...

burnabrain.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2012-10-28 09:17:05 PM

HighZoolander: The Flexecutioner: i can do all of them except the square root of 7 and the logs without a calculator.

after seeing this im surprised that their applicants cant do it. i was expecting much harder questions.

it's 7 squared, not square root


haha, thanks. totally missed that.
 
2012-10-28 09:22:56 PM
Were you guys able to do the division without aid?
i feel kinda dumb now =(
 
2012-10-28 09:25:29 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: Were you guys able to do the division without aid?
i feel kinda dumb now =(


yeah, it's long division without writing it down for me.
 
2012-10-28 09:27:37 PM

Cluckity: I got them all except this one.

2 + 3 = ?


I actually did miss that one.

But that's cuz my eyes are old and shot, and I thunk'd it was "2 dividedbysign 3".

/would've gotten that one right, tho
 
2012-10-28 09:36:54 PM

The Flexecutioner: Uchiha_Cycliste: Were you guys able to do the division without aid?
i feel kinda dumb now =(

yeah, it's long division without writing it down for me.


damnit... I was able to ballpark the first digit, and the last was easy. But couldn't get the whole thing. I feels dumb.
 
2012-10-28 09:39:45 PM

Abner Doon: The log stuff is pretty easy. Just remember log (a*b) = log a + log b and log(a/b) = log a - log b

So the first one, log 40 is cake because thats log (4*10) = log 4 (which is given) + log 10. Since it's log base 10, log 10 = 1.

The second one is cuter, log (.12) = log(12/100) = log 12 - log 100 = log (3*4) - log 100 = log 3 + log 4 - log 100.

The rest is just simple arithmatic to get the actual numbers.


I need to spend some time with the Wolfram section on logs. The rest of it was easy, I'm used to doing FEA octahedral strain matrices by hand. That's matrices full of trigonometry.

Uchiha_Cycliste: Were you guys able to do the division without aid?
i feel kinda dumb now =(


It's not that hard but I don't think your math teacher would like my explanation.
First pass 9*800 =7200 ... 513
Second pass 9*50 = 450 ... 63
Third pass 9*7=63 ... 0

So 7713/9=857. It's why they drill multiplication tables into you early on, but 9's the easy one. I'd need a little scratch paper to do the multiplication, I just got home from the gym and I'm tired.
 
2012-10-28 09:41:09 PM
I still remember the day in high school more than 30 years ago where I had it click on logs. "A log is an exponent". It finally dawn on me: A log was a freaking EXPONENT. I could use the same rules as exponents, just without having to write the base down.

I used to tutor. I told my students that the key to understanding math was to realize mathematicians are lazy. If you think about it, even Arabic numerals are a short cut: People got tired of making tick marks. 5*7 is easier write than 5+5+5+5+5+5+5. Etc. If you don't remember how to work at one level, back it up one level of short cuts.
 
2012-10-28 09:44:47 PM

wildcardjack: Uchiha_Cycliste: Were you guys able to do the division without aid?
i feel kinda dumb now =(

It's not that hard but I don't think your math teacher would like my explanation.
First pass 9*800 =7200 ... 513
Second pass 9*50 = 450 ... 63
Third pass 9*7=63 ... 0

So 7713/9=857. It's why they drill multiplication tables into you early on, but 9's the easy one. I'd need a little scratch paper to do the multiplication, I just got home from the gym and I'm tired.



That's slick, thanks for laying it out for me. I has dissapoint.
However, I bet I can use hex and binary faster than the lot of ya =P
 
2012-10-28 09:44:58 PM

spentmiles: 100% correct in 64 seconds. Next.


I too got 100% in 64 seconds.

Granted, there are lots of 64 seconds within 2 hours...
 
2012-10-28 09:46:07 PM
About the log stuff:

We were taught a pretty simple rule to remember the logarithm laws:
Always 'downgrade' the operator to its less powerful cousin, which means:
if you have a log of a multiplication, you downgrade from multiplication to addition (log of product = sum of logs).
And if you have a log of a division, you downgrade from log of division to subtraction of logs.

Somewhat similar with the log of a power being downgraded from power to multiplication, i.e. log a^b = b * log a 


/ we were also taught about using "lg" instead of "log" when referring to log10 and not wanting to write out the base
 
2012-10-28 09:49:01 PM
The multiplication was easy, 7523 x 8 just had to remember the carry and the sum,
8 and 3 .. 2 / 4

8*2 + 2 .. 1 / 84

8*5 + 1 .. 4 / 184
8 * 7 + 4 60,185
 
2012-10-28 09:52:15 PM
In some ways they tried to make things easy for people who remember basic relationships that they use as part of their job.

For example, 0.125 = 1/8

So asking for 1.125 of a number that's a single digit multiple of eight should be obvious to people who use imperial units all the time. IOW, 1 1/8 inches on your ruler is 1.125 on your caliper.
 
2012-10-28 09:59:48 PM
wildcardjack
It's not that hard but I don't think your math teacher would like my explanation.
First pass 9*800 =7200 ... 513
Second pass 9*50 = 450 ... 63
Third pass 9*7=63 ... 0


Not sure the math teacher would have a problem with this; it's essentially long division without using paper.
Although I suspect that you didn't start with 9*800, but rather by automatically doing something like this:
"7 through 9 is less than 1, lets add the next digit"
-> "can divide 78 through 9"
-> "78=72 plus change or rather 9*8 plus change"
-> "lets add the appropriate numbers of zeros"
-> "9*800=7200"
 
2012-10-28 10:09:16 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: kmmontandon: Benevolent Misanthrope: God, I feel like an idiot - I got all of them except the ones that called for 11pc and 12.5pc. Can't for the life of me remember what that pc means.

... seriously?

Percent.

Seriously. It never occurred to me. I can do calculus in my head but can't read a basic arithmetic problem.

Yeah, I know, I suck.


do you do it well?
 
2012-10-28 10:11:47 PM
I somehow picked up pc for percent somewhere along the way, so that was no problem. Logs, however, I learned and worked with so long ago they only sounded familiar, no anything I can still do.

That said, Williams would be a dream job if it weren't for the fact that I believe they're pretty tight-assed.
 
2012-10-28 10:17:21 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: The multiplication was easy, 7523 x 8 just had to remember the carry and the sum,
8 and 3 .. 2 / 4

8*2 + 2 .. 1 / 84

8*5 + 1 .. 4 / 184
8 * 7 + 4 60,185


8 * (3/4 of 10,000) = 3/4 of 80,000 = 60,000
or 8 * 2500 (= 20,000) * 3 = 60,000

then add 8 * 23 (= 184)

60,184.
 
2012-10-28 10:18:04 PM
What Williams NEEDS is two recruits that can pass a driving test.
 
2012-10-28 10:19:02 PM

HighZoolander: Uchiha_Cycliste: The multiplication was easy, 7523 x 8 just had to remember the carry and the sum,
8 and 3 .. 2 / 4

8*2 + 2 .. 1 / 84

8*5 + 1 .. 4 / 184
8 * 7 + 4 60,185

8 * (3/4 of 10,000) = 3/4 of 80,000 = 60,000
or 8 * 2500 (= 20,000) * 3 = 60,000

then add 8 * 23 (= 184)

60,184.


i think his was just a final typo on the 5. he knew 24 from the first line then followed it with 4 for the rest til the final tally.
 
2012-10-28 10:23:08 PM

HighZoolander: Uchiha_Cycliste: The multiplication was easy, 7523 x 8 just had to remember the carry and the sum,
8 and 3 .. 2 / 4

8*2 + 2 .. 1 / 84

8*5 + 1 .. 4 / 184
8 * 7 + 4 60,185

8 * (3/4 of 10,000) = 3/4 of 80,000 = 60,000
or 8 * 2500 (= 20,000) * 3 = 60,000

then add 8 * 23 (= 184)

60,184.


that's sorta sneaky, I wouldn't have seen the 7500 in there.
(I should have noted the mult. post was directed at wildcardjack.)
 
2012-10-28 10:24:48 PM

The Flexecutioner: HighZoolander: Uchiha_Cycliste: The multiplication was easy, 7523 x 8 just had to remember the carry and the sum,
8 and 3 .. 2 / 4

8*2 + 2 .. 1 / 84

8*5 + 1 .. 4 / 184
8 * 7 + 4 60,185

8 * (3/4 of 10,000) = 3/4 of 80,000 = 60,000
or 8 * 2500 (= 20,000) * 3 = 60,000

then add 8 * 23 (= 184)

60,184.

i think his was just a final typo on the 5. he knew 24 from the first line then followed it with 4 for the rest til the final tally.


I did what now?.. damn..
what HighZoolander showed was an entirely different way of getting the answer going in the opposite direction that I went. A sneaky one at that.
 
2012-10-28 10:27:49 PM
i see that now. i thought he was correcting your typo of 60,185 in your original post. but yeah, he was showing another way to look at it.
 
2012-10-28 10:32:05 PM

The Flexecutioner: i see that now. i thought he was correcting your typo of 60,185 in your original post. but yeah, he was showing another way to look at it.


I wonder if either he or I would have seen the typo if you hadn't mentioned it, most embarrassing OBO ever.
 
2012-10-28 10:34:28 PM
Mr Burns said he was considering whether to update the tests - as they are more than 50 years old - but at the end of the day, "maths is maths".

Immediate mental image:
media.giantbomb.com

/scarier still, my mental path went: Mr. Burns => Matt Groening => Futurama => the construction guy who pluralizes everything
 
2012-10-28 10:35:45 PM
If you have one bucket that contains 2 gallons and another bucket that contains 7 gallons, how many buckets do you have?

/i like money
 
2012-10-28 10:37:38 PM

Abner Doon: The log stuff is pretty easy. Just remember log (a*b) = log a + log b and log(a/b) = log a - log b

So the first one, log 40 is cake because thats log (4*10) = log 4 (which is given) + log 10. Since it's log base 10, log 10 = 1.

The second one is cuter, log (.12) = log(12/100) = log 12 - log 100 = log (3*4) - log 100 = log 3 + log 4 - log 100.

The rest is just simple arithmatic to get the actual numbers.


Thanks. Forgot all of the log stuff. The rest I could pretty much do in my head. I'm not a math major either so its kind of scary.
 
2012-10-28 10:39:03 PM
From their answer key:
5/16 / 1/8 = 2.5

Um, why did you convert from fraction to decimal? 5/2 is a perfectly cromulent reduction of that expression.
 
2012-10-28 10:42:51 PM

poot_rootbeer: From their answer key:
5/16 / 1/8 = 2.5

Um, why did you convert from fraction to decimal? 5/2 is a perfectly cromulent reduction of that expression.


Especially since rearranging the rems gives you 5*8/16
 
2012-10-28 10:50:49 PM

Abner Doon: The log stuff is pretty easy. Just remember log (a*b) = log a + log b and log(a/b) = log a - log b

So the first one, log 40 is cake because thats log (4*10) = log 4 (which is given) + log 10. Since it's log base 10, log 10 = 1.

The second one is cuter, log (.12) = log(12/100) = log 12 - log 100 = log (3*4) - log 100 = log 3 + log 4 - log 100.

The rest is just simple arithmatic to get the actual numbers.


Obviously. Duh.
 
2012-10-28 11:22:12 PM

BarryJV: xelnia: Have I just not been paying attention my whole life, or is that some British convention?

If the answer to one of those is yes is does not preclude the answer to the other being yes.


Oh snap. You're right.
 
2012-10-28 11:49:33 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: God, I feel like an idiot - I got all of them except the ones that called for 11pc and 12.5pc. Can't for the life of me remember what that pc means.


www2.b3ta.com
 
2012-10-28 11:58:08 PM
as a follower of F1, the problems at williams are much bigger than maths.
 
2012-10-28 11:59:02 PM
Wow, those were easy, you gotta be a coulter to fail that test.

/we are still making this a thing right?
 
2012-10-29 12:15:39 AM
Opens thread.
Reads posts.
Scuttles back out of thread and slams the door shut.
 
2012-10-29 12:17:10 AM
I got everything but the logs, because no one cares about logs. If you have an non-liner line or point you just use a function to show it. Log is a waste of time.
 
Displayed 50 of 138 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report