 
<translate> Gịnị bụ ajụjụ maka echiche a na-apụtachaghị ìhè, na azịza kwekọrọ na ya? Ebe ọ bụ na Michaela chọrọ oroma iri abụọ iji rijuo afọ, Cassandra na-erikwa okpukpu abụọ nke ahụ iji rijuo afọ, Cassandra chọrọ oroma iri anọ iji rijuo afọ. Ha na-eri mkpụrụ osisi apụl iri abụọ gbakwunyere iri anọ, ya bụ, mkpụrụ osisi apụl iri isii, ka afọ ju ha. Ọ bụrụ na ha ataa mkpụrụ osisi apụl iri itoolu taa, mgbe ha risịrị mkpụrụ osisi apụl iri isii ọnụ, mkpụrụ osisi apụl iri itoolu - iri isii ga-afọdụ.  Azịza ya bụ: 30 <eng> What was the question for this implicit rationale, and corresponding answer?
Since Michaela needs 20 oranges to eat to her full, and Cassandra eats twice as much to have her full, Cassandra needs 2 * 20 = 40 oranges to eat. They eat 20 + 40 = 60 oranges together to have their fill. If they picked 90 oranges today, after eating 60 together, 90 - 60 = 30 oranges would remain.
 The answer: 30 