2016 verbal review--images from ground-based telescopes

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 3:05 pm

by jervizeloy » Fri Oct 28, 2016 8:29 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
RBBmba@2014 wrote: Hi GMATGuruNY,
Got you here...Just a quick confirmation required.

So,here it's essentially meant that as there could be either SPACE-BASED or GROUND-BASED telescopes ONLY, therefore if it's NOT SPACE-BASED then it has to be GROUND-BASED, even if there is NO EXPLICIT mention of the latter.

Did I get this right ?
Correct.
Just as an integer that is NOT EVEN must be ODD, so a telescope that is NOT SPACE-BASED must be GROUND-BASED.
This sort of logic -- common sense, really -- does not need to be stated explicitly.
Hi Mitch,

This is how I see it:

Answer E is like saying "hey, ground-based telescopes won't become obsolete because they can do something that space-based telescopes can't". And that is correct.
However, this something that ground-telescopes can do is for "studying the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars". But the conclusion says that ground-based telecopes will become obsolete for "advanced astronomical research purposes". So won't we need a a sentence stating that "studying the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars" can be considered as advanced research? Otherwise, ground-based telescopes might be better than space-based for studying the history of stars but won't be so for advanced research purposes, am I wrong?

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sun Oct 30, 2016 10:50 am
jervizeloy wrote:Hi Mitch,

This is how I see it:

Answer E is like saying "hey, ground-based telescopes won't become obsolete because they can do something that space-based telescopes can't". And that is correct.
However, this something that ground-telescopes can do is for "studying the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars". But the conclusion says that ground-based telecopes will become obsolete for "advanced astronomical research purposes". So won't we need a a sentence stating that "studying the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars" can be considered as advanced research? Otherwise, ground-based telescopes might be better than space-based for studying the history of stars but won't be so for advanced research purposes, am I wrong?
Common sense tells us that detailed spectral analyses -- analyses that astronomers require when determining the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars -- are a logical example of an advanced astronomical research purpose.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:34 am
Location: China
Thanked: 1 times
GMAT Score:670

by joealam1 » Sat Nov 26, 2016 1:04 am
Hi Mitch/marty,

So basically the analysis should be as per below ?:

A) out of scope ( budget + schedule)
B) attempting to refute the premise
C) attempting to refute the premise
D) attempting to refute the premise
E) weaken the fact that space telescopes can replace ground telescope

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2131
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
Thanked: 955 times
Followed by:140 members
GMAT Score:800

by MartyMurray » Sat Nov 26, 2016 7:46 am
joealam1 wrote:Hi Mitch/marty,

So basically the analysis should be as per below ?:

A) out of scope ( budget + schedule)
B) attempting to refute the premise
C) attempting to refute the premise
D) attempting to refute the premise
E) weaken the fact that space telescopes can replace ground telescope
That looks pretty good Joe.

At the same time, for E, I guess I would like to see mentioned the specific idea that E shows a reason why ground based telescopes will not become obsolete, which idea is a little different from the idea that they cannot be replaced.

While maybe you fully understand what is going on in the question, being super specific and clear about what is going on in CR questions is key for getting them right consistently.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 11:09 am

by gocoder » Mon Nov 28, 2016 9:25 pm
GMATGuruNY wrote:
info2 wrote: Hi Mitch

Option D is also wrong because it weakens the premise as well. Right?

Thanks
Correct!
D: When large-aperture telescopes are located at high altitudes near the equator, they permit the best Earth-based observations of the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, a prime target of astronomical research.
Like B, this option attempts to weaken the PREMISE that images from ground-based telescopes are invariably distorted by the Earth's atmosphere.
A premise is a FACT; it cannot be weakened..
Eliminate D.
Can B and D be wrong because both of them talk about specific telescopes,subgroup of telescopes located either on the mountains or on hills at equator ?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2131
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
Thanked: 955 times
Followed by:140 members
GMAT Score:800

by MartyMurray » Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:19 pm
gocoder wrote:
GMATGuruNY wrote:
info2 wrote: Hi Mitch

Option D is also wrong because it weakens the premise as well. Right?

Thanks
Correct!
D: When large-aperture telescopes are located at high altitudes near the equator, they permit the best Earth-based observations of the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, a prime target of astronomical research.
Like B, this option attempts to weaken the PREMISE that images from ground-based telescopes are invariably distorted by the Earth's atmosphere.
A premise is a FACT; it cannot be weakened..
Eliminate D.
Can B and D be wrong because both of them talk about specific telescopes,subgroup of telescopes located either on the mountains or on hills at equator ?
Definitely NOT.

That way of eliminating answer choices is WAY TOO SIMPLISTIC for consistently getting CR questions right.

The conclusion is that ground based telescopes will become obsolete. There could be about some specific telescope or subgroup of telescopes a fact that weakens the conclusion.

In fact, the OA talks about a very specific use of telescopes. So by a similar logic, maybe E would be eliminated.

In fact, from what I have seen, in doing CR questions, eliminating the OA first, yup, FIRST, is something people often do. Why? Because they attempt to use simplistic methods to get the right answer to CR questions, and in many cases the simplistic methods filter out the OA, leaving people with four wrong answers to choose from.

So overall, the message I want to give you is to dispense with the idea that the way to rock in CR is to come up with a bunch of formulaic ways to get to answers. The way to rock in CR is to use high level thinking to actually see and analyze exactly what is going on.

Why bother with some thing like "This answer choice is too specific." "This answer choice talks about X, while the conclusion is about Y." or "This answer choice is extreme."?

Those ideas, and even "out of scope", tend to be cop outs or half measures.

Hey, if you want to get some right answers with some minimal prep, sure use those things, but gocoder, you are working at this for real, training hard. So take it to the next level. If you are going to work on something, work on seeing what's going on in the questions for real.

You can prove each wrong answer wrong, for real.

You can prove the right answer right, for real.

Here's what I mean.

(A) The fact that a single space based telescope is over budget does not change the dynamic described in the prompt, that spaced based telescopes provide better images, and therefore ground based telescopes will become obsolete.

(B) This does not change the fact that space based telescopes provide better images.

(C) Avoiding most of the distortion does not mean avoiding all of the distortion. Space based telescopes still provide better images, and this does not weaken a conclusion based on that fact.

(D) This is irrelevant. The argument is based on a key difference between space based telescopes and Earth based telescopes. The fact that a certain way of using Earth based telescopes is the best way to use Earth based telescopes does not affect the connection between the better images provided by space based telescopes and the expected obsolescence of Earth based, or ground based, telescopes.

(E) Ok. Here you have it. Since ground based telescopes can do something key that space based telescopes cannot do, the idea that ground based telescopes will become obsolete does not currently make sense.

No rules. No formulaic methods. Just straight up logic. Always works. Never fails.

If you want to really ROCK at CR, focus on learning to use vision and logic.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:34 am
Location: China
Thanked: 1 times
GMAT Score:670

by joealam1 » Tue Nov 29, 2016 12:54 am
Hi Marty,

Looking back at E):
"....require telescopes with more light*gathering capacity than space telescope can provide."
There is nothing is this answer choice that proves that the ground telescope can do the job.
Maybe it's a type of telescope under development that is not yet available.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 11:09 am

by gocoder » Tue Nov 29, 2016 6:03 am
Marty Murray wrote:
No rules. No formulaic methods. Just straight up logic. Always works. Never fails.

If you want to really ROCK at CR, focus on learning to use vision and logic.
You made some great points here! I don't know how many times you stressed about logic and thought process.

I'm endeavoring for this but the change is hard:)

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2131
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
Thanked: 955 times
Followed by:140 members
GMAT Score:800

by MartyMurray » Tue Nov 29, 2016 6:29 am
gocoder wrote:
Marty Murray wrote:
No rules. No formulaic methods. Just straight up logic. Always works. Never fails.

If you want to really ROCK at CR, focus on learning to use vision and logic.
You made some great points here! I don't know how many times you stressed about logic and thought process.

I'm endeavoring for this but the change is hard:)
Yup.

Try spending a lot of time on each question, looking for key details and using logic to define why each wrong answer is wrong and each right answer is right. Also, you can figure out how a person might end up choosing each of the wrong answers. A half hour or more on one question is not too much time to spend.

Shoot for close to 100% accuracy, taking as much time as you need in order to get 100% or close to 100% of the CR questions you see correct. Any time you don't get one right, go back and look for details that you missed and seek to determine what flaws in your thinking or process led you to the wrong answer.

You can be sure that in doing these types of things you will be developing your vision and logical skills, and so you will see what is going on in CR questions with increasing clarity.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.