Earth's river salt into ocean

Expert replies

jcmsolis: Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts; Posts: 11; Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 10:39 am; Location: Nicaragua

by jcmsolis » Thu Dec 06, 2007 1:07 pm

The Earth’s rivers constantly carry dissolved salts into its oceans. Clearly, therefore, by taking the resulting increase in salt levels in the oceans over the past hundred years and then determining how many centuries of such increases it would have taken the oceans to reach current salt levels from a hypothetical initial salt-free state, the maximum age of the Earth’s oceans can be accurately estimated.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. The quantities of dissolved salts deposited by rivers in the Earth’s oceans have not been unusually large during the past hundred years.

B. At any given time, all the Earth’s rivers have about the same salt levels.

C. There are salts that leach into the Earth’s oceans directly from the ocean floor.

D. There is no method superior to that based on salt levels for estimating the maximum age of the Earth’s oceans.

E. None of the salts carried into the Earth’s oceans by rivers are used up by biological activity in the oceans

Like this post

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Thu Dec 06, 2007 1:07 pm

sankruth: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 195; Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:33 am; Thanked: 10 times

by sankruth » Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:36 pm

The argument is dissolved salts from rivers go into the ocean which incerases ocean salt levels. So calculating rate increase in salt levels will tell us a time when there was no salt in the ocean (perhaps when the Earth was born)

IMO, its E. I used the 'Negation Technique' i.e. take the opposite of E and see its effect on the argument. If E is to be false then the proposed method to calculate Earth's age will not work.

B was another choice but I felt E did the job better.

What is the OA?

Like this post

samirpandeyit62: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 460; Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:42 am; Thanked: 27 times

by samirpandeyit62 » Fri Dec 07, 2007 3:22 am

I agree with sankruth, It should be E

Regards
Samir

Like this post

sujaysolanki: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 214; Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:30 am; Thanked: 15 times

by sujaysolanki » Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:01 am

A. The quantities of dissolved salts deposited by rivers in the Earth’s oceans have not been unusually large during the past hundred years.

B. At any given time, all the Earth’s rivers have about the same salt levels.
Out of scope

C. There are salts that leach into the Earth’s oceans directly from the ocean floor.

Weakens not an assumption

D. There is no method superior to that based on salt levels for estimating the maximum age of the Earth’s oceans.

Out of scope

E. None of the salts carried into the Earth’s oceans by rivers are used up by biological activity in the oceans

If the determination process is going to take place by measuring the increase in salt for last 100 years then this does not make sense ...because it wont matter

Hence it seems out of scope ..

Hence A

Like this post

jan08: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 64; Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:53 am; Thanked: 2 times

by jan08 » Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:38 am

IMO E becoz the argument is based on the assumption that the source of salt is only rivers and also the age can be calculated by the amount of salt increase...if the ocean salt is being used for any biological purpose then the amount of salt in ocean over the past years will not be correct (as calculated against the source...i.e river)..hence E is the assumption.

OA please?

Like this post

rahulg83: Legendary Member; Posts: 575; Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 amFollowed by: 4 members; Location: India; Thanked: 18 times; GMAT Score:710

Re: Earth's river salt into ocean

by rahulg83 » Tue May 26, 2009 4:24 am

jcmsolis wrote:The Earth’s rivers constantly carry dissolved salts into its oceans. Clearly, therefore, by taking the resulting increase in salt levels in the oceans over the past hundred years and then determining how many centuries of such increases it would have taken the oceans to reach current salt levels from a hypothetical initial salt-free state, the maximum age of the Earth’s oceans can be accurately estimated.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. The quantities of dissolved salts deposited by rivers in the Earth’s oceans have not been unusually large during the past hundred years.

B. At any given time, all the Earth’s rivers have about the same salt levels.

C. There are salts that leach into the Earth’s oceans directly from the ocean floor.

D. There is no method superior to that based on salt levels for estimating the maximum age of the Earth’s oceans.

E. None of the salts carried into the Earth’s oceans by rivers are used up by biological activity in the oceans

IMO A is the answer, if the quantity of salts put into ocean by the rivers is unusaually large during last century, we can not consistently determine the amount ejected by the rivers previous to this century, hence the argument falls apart

Like this post

Musicolo: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 116; Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:56 am

by Musicolo » Tue May 26, 2009 7:25 am

B is pretty good, however, variations in the amount of salt in any particular river over the past is not relevant since they only meassure increase in salt levels in the oceans. How salt was contributed to the oceans' salt increase from any particular river is irrelevant since the final level of salt in the ocean is considered. I still almost chose B, but I think its E. Negation technique helps one arrive at E, I agree.

Like this post

mehravikas: Legendary Member; Posts: 1161; Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 amFollowed by: 1 member; Location: Sydney; Thanked: 23 times

by mehravikas » Tue May 26, 2009 5:41 pm

IMO - E

OA please

Like this post

caprion: Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts; Posts: 21; Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 9:40 pm; Thanked: 1 times

by caprion » Tue May 26, 2009 9:29 pm

A. The quantities of dissolved salts deposited by rivers in the Earth’s oceans have not been unusually large during the past hundred years.
Well it doesn't tell if the quantity of salts dissolved was large earlier before either.
So not A

I narrowed down between B and E.

E has a fall out that if the consumption of biological activity is constant throughout( which is not stated), then also we could have determined the age.

But i still go with E.

Whats the OA.

Like this post

nervesofsteel: Legendary Member; Posts: 594; Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:51 pm; Thanked: 12 times

by nervesofsteel » Tue May 26, 2009 10:37 pm

A

in consistency in salt deposition will impact results of analysis....

Like this post

nervesofsteel: Legendary Member; Posts: 594; Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:51 pm; Thanked: 12 times

by nervesofsteel » Wed May 27, 2009 10:53 pm

whts the OA..??

Like this post

n_niaz: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 40; Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:11 pm; Location: NYC; Thanked: 1 times; GMAT Score:720

by n_niaz » Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:31 pm

OA ???

I think its E. "A" does say that the salt deposit not been constant therefore might be hard to predict, but the key is that it has been deposited, so you can take it into account. Whereas for E, the assumption that the salt stays there and is not used by an external source is correct.

Like this post

gmatstud: Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts; Posts: 21; Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:22 am; Location: India; Thanked: 1 times; GMAT Score:630

by gmatstud » Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:43 am

I'll go with A

If the deposits of salt were unusually high in last hundred years, the calculation of the max age of ocean would not at all be accurate. As author is taking a sample of 100 years data and considering it as a reference, the deposits needs to be comparable and not unusually high.

E states that none of salts is used by biological activity in ocean. Even if it is used up by, thats fine. Say for eg 10% of deposited salt in last 100 years was used up by biological activity. This activity could probably persist earlier also and same 10% percentage would have been used up in earlier years. So 90% of deposited salt amount refers to 100 years. With this data we can still find the max age of ocean.

Never give up .......

Like this post

blackarrow: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 104; Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 8:05 pm; Location: Ohio, US; Thanked: 6 times

by blackarrow » Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:37 pm

I will go with A too.

Its better to burn out than to fade away

Like this post

sudeep_ar: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 73; Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:52 pm; Thanked: 1 times

by sudeep_ar » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:25 pm

Another vote for E.

Like this post

Post new topic Post Reply

GMAT Course Reviews

560 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (560 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review