Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

[Q]: CONTEXT: Let's look at the two circumstances that resulted in her move. The Bet Monica and Rachel lose the apartment after a game with Joey and Chandler. When Joey and Chandler are moving in, Rachel seems to think it's a joke. Think about it for a second, if someone told you to get up and move into another apartment, especially one that seems smaller than Monica's would you do it? Her bed room is probably customized the way she likes it, if she were to move, she would have to spend time re-customizing it. Chandler Moves In Remember again, Rachel didn't think she would have to move out, she thought Chandler would move in, and it would be the three of them. However, the circumstances are different, after Las Vegas, Monica and Chandler agree to move in together. She attempts to move in with Ross, but they are still married unknowing to Rachel until the lawyer calls, at which point she furious. She eventually moves in with Phoebe, but the apartment burns down. This leaves Joey which means, Naked Thursdays or Wednesdays ;D. Out of necessity she moves in with Joey. She still lives close to her friends, and she doesn't need to get to know a new roommate.  <sep>  Q: Why does Rachel hate living at the other apartment?
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: This has been unanswered for too long, so I'm just going to say it. NO. That is not him. Beyond throwing CGI money away on such an inconsequential shot, if you look at the other man's features you'll notice much different bone and cartilage structures around the eye sockets, more-centered zygomatic bones (cheekbones), and a more acute angle where the nasal bones indent and leave the brow. Plus, this man looks nothing like The Professor / Bernard Fallon (Borden's alter-ego). I see no reason to assume this is anything other than someone reading too much into a slight resemblance. Do I have definitive proof? No, I do not. Also, I have difficulty in seeing any kind of compelling resemblance between the two men. Another thing to consider is that the twins kept public contact at a minimum. They did not seem to "hang out" together. This is explained by Borden's reveal of the so-called "frail" old Chinese magician whose act was basically performed off-stage; ie: the man was fit enough to work heavy bowls of water but presented himself as a feeble old man who required canes and / or assistance to go to and from the theater. That was the real act. Borden would not likely risk exposure by sitting next to himself.  <sep>  Q: Is Borden's secret revealed as soon as the 11th minute of the movie?
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: My guess is that Vinay did not know Anjali before their meeting at the jewelry shop. I infer this from analyzing the character of Vinay. He doesn't appear like someone who will use crooked methods. Also, regarding the sog sequence, I think it was a mere coincidence, intentionally plotted by the director to create mystery.  <sep>  Q: Does Vinay know Anjali before meeting her at the jewelry shop? A: My guess is that Vinay did not know Anjali before their meeting at the jewelry shop  Q: Why do you think that he did not know her? A: I infer this from analyzing the character of Vinay  Q: Do yuo think that he was not brazen enough to sek employment knowing the owners daughter was who he was interested in? A: He doesn't appear like someone who will use crooked methods  Q: Is it possible that he knew her but played like he did not? A: I think it was a mere coincidence, intentionally plotted by the director to create mystery  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Or was it a mere coincidence that Dav happened to be on the same road as Tanuja?
[A]:
Yes