Prior to 1965 geologists assumed that the two giant

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:13 am
Location: India
Thanked: 22 times
Followed by:7 members
GMAT Score:540
Prior to 1965 geologists assumed that the two giant rock plates meeting at the San Andreas Fault generate heat through friction as they grind past each other, but in 1965 Henyey found that temperatures in drill holes near the fault were not as elevated as had been expected. Some geologists wondered whether the absence of friction-generated heat could be explained by the kinds of rock composing the fault. Geologists' pre-1965 assumptions concerning heat generated in the fault were based on calculations about common varieties of rocks, such as limestone and granite; but "weaker" materials, such as clays, had already been identified in samples retrieved from the fault zone. Under normal conditions, rocks composed of clay produce far less friction than do other rock types.

In 1992 Byerlee tested whether these materials would produce friction 10 to 15 kilometers below the Earth's surface. Byerlee found that when clay samples were subjected to the thousands of atmospheres of pressure they would encounter deep inside the Earth, they produced as much friction as was produced by other rock types. The harder rocks push against each other, the hotter they become; in other words, pressure itself, not only the rocks' properties, affects frictional heating. Geologists therefore wondered whether the friction between the plates was being reduced by pockets of pressurized water within the fault that push the plates away from each other.

The passage suggests which of the following regarding Henyey's findings about temperature in the San Andreas Fault?

A.Scientists have yet to formulate a definitive explanation for Henyey's findings.
B.Recent research suggests that Henyey's explanation for the findings should be modified.
C.Henyey's findings had to be recalculated in light of Byerlee's 1992 experiment.
D.Henyey's findings provided support for an assumption long held by geologists.
E.Scientists have been unable to duplicate Henyey's findings using more recent experimental methods.

Source - GMAT Prep
OA - A

Can anybody help me explain this question with proper reasoning?
Sahil Chaudhary
If you find this post helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Thank" icon.
https://www.sahilchaudhary007.blocked

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Sat Dec 14, 2013 9:25 am
sahilchaudhary wrote:Prior to 1965 geologists assumed that the two giant rock plates meeting at the San Andreas Fault generate heat through friction as they grind past each other, but in 1965 Henyey found that temperatures in drill holes near the fault were not as elevated as had been expected. Some geologists wondered whether the absence of friction-generated heat could be explained by the kinds of rock composing the fault. Geologists' pre-1965 assumptions concerning heat generated in the fault were based on calculations about common varieties of rocks, such as limestone and granite; but "weaker" materials, such as clays, had already been identified in samples retrieved from the fault zone. Under normal conditions, rocks composed of clay produce far less friction than do other rock types.

In 1992 Byerlee tested whether these materials would produce friction 10 to 15 kilometers below the Earth's surface. Byerlee found that when clay samples were subjected to the thousands of atmospheres of pressure they would encounter deep inside the Earth, they produced as much friction as was produced by other rock types. The harder rocks push against each other, the hotter they become; in other words, pressure itself, not only the rocks' properties, affects frictional heating. Geologists therefore wondered whether the friction between the plates was being reduced by pockets of pressurized water within the fault that push the plates away from each other.

The passage suggests which of the following regarding Henyey's findings about temperature in the San Andreas Fault?
A. Scientists have yet to formulate a definitive explanation for Henyey's findings.
Looks okay.
The underlined portions in red suggest that the scientists may still be looking for an explanation.
KEEP A

B. Recent research suggests that Henyey's explanation for the findings should be modified.
Recent research? There's nothing about recent research in the passage. Also, Henyey never offered an explanation for the findings. Henyey merely made some observations.
ELIMINATE B

C. Henyey's findings had to be recalculated in light of Byerlee's 1992 experiment.
Byerlee's experiment doesn't undermine Henyey's findings. Byerlee's experiment was meant to test geologists's theories explaining Henyey's findings.
ELIMINATE C

D. Henyey's findings provided support for an assumption long held by geologists.
Quite the opposite.
The passage reads, "but in 1965 Henyey found that temperatures in drill holes near the fault were not as elevated as had been expected."
ELIMINATE D

E. Scientists have been unable to duplicate Henyey's findings using more recent experimental methods.
There is no mention of any attempt to duplicate Henyey's findings.
ELIMINATE E

Answer: A

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:30 pm
Followed by:1 members

by saheebabatra » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:04 pm
Hi Brent,

" but in 1965 Henyey found that temperatures in drill holes near the fault were not as elevated as had been expected. Some geologists wondered whether the absence of friction-generated heat could be explained by the kinds of rock composing the fault. Geologists' pre-1965 assumptions concerning heat generated in the fault were based on calculations about common varieties of rocks, such as limestone and granite; but "weaker" materials, such as clays, had already been identified in samples retrieved from the fault zone. Under normal conditions, rocks composed of clay produce far less friction than do other rock types. "

Doesn't the highlighted part say that Henyey's findings supported for an assumption(that weaker materials like clay produce less friction) long held by geologists??

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:22 pm
saheebabatra wrote:Hi Brent,

" but in 1965 Henyey found that temperatures in drill holes near the fault were not as elevated as had been expected. Some geologists wondered whether the absence of friction-generated heat could be explained by the kinds of rock composing the fault. Geologists' pre-1965 assumptions concerning heat generated in the fault were based on calculations about common varieties of rocks, such as limestone and granite; but "weaker" materials, such as clays, had already been identified in samples retrieved from the fault zone. Under normal conditions, rocks composed of clay produce far less friction than do other rock types. "

Doesn't the highlighted part say that Henyey's findings supported for an assumption(that weaker materials like clay produce less friction) long held by geologists??
It seems that way.
However, later on in the passage, Byerlee tests this idea and ... found that when clay samples were subjected to the thousands of atmospheres of pressure they would encounter deep inside the Earth, they produced as much friction as was produced by other rock types. The harder rocks push against each other, the hotter they become; in other words, pressure itself, not only the rocks' properties, affects frictional heating.

So, the true cause of the lower-than-expected temperatures has not been definitively proven.

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:34 am
Thanked: 7 times

by parveen110 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:23 am
Hi Brent,

I've watched your videos on RC. You suggest that main idea should be devoid of terminologies/wordings from the passage. In that sense, what should be the main idea here??

The best I could make up the main idea here was: 'Curiosity around the lower temp. levels across the rock plates'. I know i'm way off. But i thought i'd write still.

Thanks!

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:45 am
parveen110 wrote:Hi Brent,

I've watched your videos on RC. You suggest that main idea should be devoid of terminologies/wordings from the passage. In that sense, what should be the main idea here??

The best I could make up the main idea here was: 'Curiosity around the lower temp. levels across the rock plates'. I know i'm way off. But i thought i'd write still.

Thanks!
How about:

Trying to explain a strange observation.

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:50 am
parveen110 wrote:Hi Brent,

I've watched your videos on RC. You suggest that main idea should be devoid of terminologies/wordings from the passage. In that sense, what should be the main idea here??

The best I could make up the main idea here was: 'Curiosity around the lower temp. levels across the rock plates'. I know i'm way off. But i thought i'd write still.

Thanks!
How about:

Trying to explain a strange observation.

Aside: I just want to clarify that when looking for the main idea, the TEST-TAKER should try to formulate one without using precise terminology from the passage, since the answer choices often don't use such terminology. That said, some answer choices may contain terminology from the passage.

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:34 am
Thanked: 7 times

by parveen110 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:53 pm
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
parveen110 wrote:Hi Brent,

I've watched your videos on RC. You suggest that main idea should be devoid of terminologies/wordings from the passage. In that sense, what should be the main idea here??

The best I could make up the main idea here was: 'Curiosity around the lower temp. levels across the rock plates'. I know i'm way off. But i thought i'd write still.

Thanks!
How about:

Trying to explain a strange observation.

Aside: I just want to clarify that when looking for the main idea, the TEST-TAKER should try to formulate one without using precise terminology from the passage, since the answer choices often don't use such terminology. That said, some answer choices may contain terminology from the passage.

Cheers,
Brent
Brilliant Brent!!(w0w, that rhymes!))

Also, the reason behind finding the main idea free from any terminology from the passage is that it really gives me a very clear idea as to how well i have understood the passage.
Its a leaf taken from your book. Thanks!!

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:49 am
Thanks parveen110!

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image