The taxpayer had received a "corrected" statement (fortunately he kept it), but the IRS apparently had not received a similar document, or had not adjusted the records in their computers to reflect it.
Thus, the correct statement is that the beam entering B has Sx = +ℏ/2 and is composed of an equal mixture of the states Sy = +ℏ/2 and Sy = −ℏ/2 i.e., the x-component of angular momentum is known but the y-component is not.
The correct statement is this: Events have a four-dimensional order, by means of which we can say that an event A is nearer to an event B than to an event C; this is a purely ordinal matter, not involving anything quantitative.
Hence the correct statement is as follows.
Even though this skill is essential, it is by no means sufficient for the correct statement of the problem.
Both sets of students performed poorly in indentifying the correct statement (rejecters, 28%; accepters, 27%).
Results from statement 23 indicate that students recognize the correct statement about a scientific theory whether or not they think they understand science.
The correct statement of the doctrine of precedent is that later courts are bound by cases not simply by rationes and bound to either follow or distinguish them.
For example, Item 1 in the GeDI asks students whether a biologist would agree or disagree with the (correct) statement that "Genetic drift is more pronounced in the [founding] island population than the [larger] mainland population in these first few generations" (Supplementary Materials in Price et al. 2014).
Thus, the correct statement that, in the case that $\sqrt{a/b}$ is irrational, the trajectory will traverse, for each value of $x$, an infinity of values of $y$ within any interval however small, could easily have lead him to believe (incorrectly) that all values of $x$ and $y$ are traversed in the course of time.
