Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
Thanks,
Cappy
Astronomer's Argument
This topic has expert replies
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:33 pm
- Thanked: 5 times
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:07 am
- Thanked: 21 times
- Followed by:14 members
- GMAT Score:750
That's what I put too - but according to the GMAT Prep CAT test, the answer is E. The test doesn't have answer explanations though, so I'm wondering why. Anyone have any explanation?
Thanks,
Cappy
Thanks,
Cappy
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:33 pm
- Thanked: 5 times
Hi Cappy,
This is a gmat prep question right ? Even i got this once in my test and it was the first question in my verbal . I hated it and i got it wrong..anyway i think i can explain why E is the answer now ..
Passage says :
1) Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere
2) In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere.
I think these 2 sentences giv us an idea why the answer should be E.
The astronomers are tring 2 get a answer for the phenimenon described above.
And eventually they do ... They conculde saying that fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
Is it clear now ??
This is a gmat prep question right ? Even i got this once in my test and it was the first question in my verbal . I hated it and i got it wrong..anyway i think i can explain why E is the answer now ..
Passage says :
1) Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere
2) In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere.
I think these 2 sentences giv us an idea why the answer should be E.
The astronomers are tring 2 get a answer for the phenimenon described above.
And eventually they do ... They conculde saying that fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
Is it clear now ??
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:07 am
- Thanked: 21 times
- Followed by:14 members
- GMAT Score:750
Thanks Vignesh! Yes, this is a GMAT Prep CAT question. It was my first question too and I got it wrong as well.
I think looking back, I still don't understand the author's reasoning, but I can understand the structure of the sentences. The author's use of 'almost certainly' in the first bolded part suggests a judgement, which would fit in with E. I think it's obvious that the last sentence is the conclusion.
I'm still sketchy as to the reasoning though.
I think looking back, I still don't understand the author's reasoning, but I can understand the structure of the sentences. The author's use of 'almost certainly' in the first bolded part suggests a judgement, which would fit in with E. I think it's obvious that the last sentence is the conclusion.
I'm still sketchy as to the reasoning though.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 9:21 am
- Thanked: 3 times
- Followed by:1 members
I am in between D and E
However, I prefer E ,
However, I prefer E ,
Please share your idea and your reasoning
https://bmnmed.com/home/
https://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org
https://bmnmed.com/home/
https://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 594
- Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:51 pm
- Thanked: 12 times
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
The Answer should be E...
Reason : the conclusion of the passage is that some fragments were large enough to penetrate the outer layer...
First BOLD Face : "The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur" if we see its relation to conclusion we can see B,C are wrong...
Second Bold face : "it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up".. Its the conclusion..
If we put this choice to check A,D,E... E certainly scores over A and B...
Hope this helps...
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
The Answer should be E...
Reason : the conclusion of the passage is that some fragments were large enough to penetrate the outer layer...
First BOLD Face : "The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur" if we see its relation to conclusion we can see B,C are wrong...
Second Bold face : "it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up".. Its the conclusion..
If we put this choice to check A,D,E... E certainly scores over A and B...
Hope this helps...
- GMATGuruNY
- 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
Astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere in hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size.CappyAA wrote:Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
BF2 = what astronomers CONCLUDED about the fragments' size:
It is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
The correct answer must indicate that BF2 is the CONCLUSION of the argument.
Eliminate A, C and D.
BF1: The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur.
Since the fragments almost certainly contained no sulfur, astronomers offer the following explanation for the sulfur found in Jupiter's outer atmosphere:
Sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmospher layer.
Thus, BF1 SUPPORTS the conclusion that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
Eliminate B.
The correct answer is E.
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
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
Hi Mitch, thanks for the explanation. Through POE, the answer is obviously E. But, if you analyse what E says, it's not entirely accurate which creates a doubt when deciding under time pressure. The 1st BF (The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur) does not seem to support the conclusion "it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up". However, the 1st BF would support this conclusion if it also included "Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer". E would also be correct if it said "The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is PART OF that conclusion". Perhaps it's better to simply use the POE and get to the correct option without much brain-racking.GMATGuruNY wrote:Astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere in hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size.CappyAA wrote:Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
BF2 = what astronomers CONCLUDED about the fragments' size:
It is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
The correct answer must indicate that BF2 is the CONCLUSION of the argument.
Eliminate A, C and D.
BF1: The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur.
Since the fragments almost certainly contained no sulfur, astronomers offer the following explanation for the sulfur found in Jupiter's outer atmosphere:
Sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmospher layer.
Thus, BF1 SUPPORTS the conclusion that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
Eliminate B.
The correct answer is E.