Milky Way and MACHOS

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:35 pm
Location: London, UK
Thanked: 19 times
GMAT Score:680

Milky Way and MACHOS

by II » Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:06 am
Would be interested to learn how others have approached this question ...
Thanks
Attachments
MilkyWay and MACHOS.jpg

Legendary Member
Posts: 683
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:58 pm
Location: Dubai
Thanked: 73 times
Followed by:2 members

by mals24 » Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:31 am
Ok you can use POE

1. The passage does not mention anything about the fact that Paczynski's theory is no longer credited. Out of Scope

2. Again there is no criticism mentioned against Paczynski or any other astronomers theory. Out of Scope.

3. The author does discuss the reason why Pacynski proposed the MACHO theory, but the passage does not discuss whether the theory was influential or whether any one got influenced by it. The 2nd part is Out of Scope.

4. No dispute between the astronomers is mentioned. Irrelevant.

5. The author first explains Paczynski's theory. Then he says that the microlensing logic can be flawed and he goes on to explain why it could be incorrect. Notice this line in the passage, 'can be mistaken for microlensing'. The portion after this line, the author explains why the astronomers can mistaken the phenomenon as microlensing. (Its in the 10th last line).

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:35 pm
Location: London, UK
Thanked: 19 times
GMAT Score:680

by II » Sun Nov 30, 2008 11:39 am
Thanks for the response ... thats useful to understand why the incorrect answer choices are wrong.