Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, developed in the mid-1960's, the holds that the major features of Earth's surface are created by the horizontal motions of Earth's outer shell, or lithosphere―a similar theory was rejected by the geological community. In 1912, Alfred Wegener proposed, in a widely debated theory that came to be called continental drift, that Earth's continents were mobile. To most geologists today, Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory: the horizontal mobility of pieces of Earth's crust; the essential difference between oceanic and continental crust; and a causal connection between horizontal displacements and the formation of mountain chains. Yet despite the considerable overlap between Wegener's concepts and the later widely embraced plate tectonics theory, and despite the fact that continental drift theory presented a possible solution to the problem of the origin of mountains at a time when existing explanations were seriously in doubt, in its day Wegener's theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists. Most geologists and many historians today believe that Wegener's theory was rejected because of its lack of an adequate mechanical basis. Stephen Jay Gould, for example, argues that continental drift theory was rejected because it did not explain how continents could move through an apparently solid oceanic floor. However, as Anthony Hallam has pointed out, many scientific phenomena, such as the ice ages, have been accepted before they could be fully explained. The most likely cause for the rejection of continental drift―a cause that has been largely ignored because we consider Wegener's theory to have been validated by the theory of plate tectonics―is the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it. Most of Wegener's evidence consisted of homologies―similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field, supported by the use of hammers, hand lenses, and field notebooks. In contrast, the data supporting plate tectonics were impressively geophysical―instrumental determinations of the physical properties of Earth garnered through the use of seismographs, magnetometers, and computers. 我选了E considerable overlap前面是despite XXX说明这个是个成就，他和后面的反对W的观点的事情是相反的。所以感觉D说用这个词的目的是解释为啥W理论。请老师辨析DE！谢谢！

调查1200人对A B C 的喜好，喜欢A的40%，喜欢B的58%，喜欢C的40%，同时喜欢AB的30%，求喜欢C但不喜欢A B的人

问题：在“数的整除性质小节中”，第一段写到，如果a能被b整除，记作aΙb. 但如果照这么理解的话，为什么在性质3: 如果b、c都能整除a且b和c互质，那么b与c的积能整除a。以上说法化成公式的表示为：bΙa 。但如果根据上面的被整除表达，这里不应该写为aΙb嘛？

G（x）表示x的取整且是小于x的，L（x）表示x取整且是大于x的，问L（x）-G（x）的所有可能值的的集合？ （-1,0） （1,0）等

题目：1993年的元旦是星期五，1994年的元旦是星期几。 问题：在文字解释中提到，问题的实质是求用7去除某一天的天数后所得的余数。然后引出，因为15与365除以7后，余数都是1，所以15与365对于模7同余。但15这个数字是怎么推到出来的呢？

问题：由于以前完全没有学习过“同余”的概念，因此书中的解释完全不明白。还烦请MAY老师帮忙讲解一下。

题目：求143∧89（143的89次方）除以7的余数 问题：（1）如何利用同余的概念推出最后的结果的？ （2） 如果可以不用同余概念，还有什么其他方法可以处理此类题型嘛？

题目：A Printer numbered consecutively the pages of a book, beginning with 1 on the first page. In numbering the pages, he printed a total of 189 digits. How many pages are there in the book? 问题：看了中文翻译并听了管老师的讲解，我都没弄明白这个题目的解题思路。的别是对“a total of 189 digits”的处理。

DS：已知半径为7，求ABR 的周长？ 条件1：∠x=120 度 条件2：△ABR 的面积为(49/9) π 图片附件

题目：If n is a prime number greater than 3, what is the remainder when n的平方is divided by 12? 问题：当管老师解题时，他出了3个方程式，分别是： 1） n=3A+1, n的平方=9A(square)+6A+1 2) n=3A+2, n的平方=9A(square)+12A+4 3) n=2A+1, n的平方=4A(square)+4A+1 我不明白的点是：这3个方程式是怎么推到或者是一看到题目就这么设出来的？

有图。