K-Belt Object

This topic has expert replies
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

Legendary Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:53 am
Thanked: 52 times
Followed by:5 members

by killer1387 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:40 pm
IMO E

OA??

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:21 pm
IMO E, evident by para 3.

You may have been tricked by C and D which are close
C is defied by line 1 of last para and D is incorrect since there was one incident of decreasing whereas D mentions a trend
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

Legendary Member
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
Thanked: 114 times
Followed by:12 members

by patanjali.purpose » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:41 pm
vikram4689 wrote:IMO E, evident by para 3.

You may have been tricked by C and D which are close
C is defied by line 1 of last para and D is incorrect since there was one incident of decreasing whereas D mentions a trend
OA-E;

Can you explain how you eliminated C?

Legendary Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:53 am
Thanked: 52 times
Followed by:5 members

by killer1387 » Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:45 pm
@PATANJALI

Passage suggests "less well known..." ALSO it says "70000 other small bodies, primarily found in K-belt.."
never does passage concretely defines 70000 as K Belt Objects or does states any relation thereby.

Basically nothing in the passage supports option C.

HTH

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:09 am
patanjali.purpose wrote:
vikram4689 wrote:IMO E, evident by para 3.

You may have been tricked by C and D which are close
C is defied by line 1 of last para and D is incorrect since there was one incident of decreasing whereas D mentions a trend
OA-E;

Can you explain how you eliminated C?
In last 2 lines of para 1, Passage at least 70000 bodies are found in K-Belt and then it categorizes KBO's. In 1st line of last para, passage says K-belt is NOW much smaller than it was. So "at least 70000 figure" may have been reduced to (say) "at least 50000". We do not have any info to identify the at least ____ , we only know that number is reduced.



Killer1387,
never does passage concretely defines 70000 as K Belt Objects or does states any relation thereby.
We can take small bodies found in K-belt as KBO's
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:46 am
Location: Bangalore
GMAT Score:610

by [email protected] » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:01 am
According to the passage, which of the following can be inferred about Kuiper Belt Objects?
a) they orbit between Neptune and Pluto ( NO, the para also says that Pluto and these KBO are little Plutos)
b) they are all affected by the presence of Neptune ( NO, in 3rd para it says so - occasional proximity can send them out of solar system entirely. It means not all but only some )
c) at least 70,000 of them are known to exist ( Yes, 1st para says so)
d) the number of them is decreasing ( NO, nowhere this is mentioned)
e) some of them travel beyond the solar system ( Yes, this is mentioned)

My confusion is between C and E....can any please tell me if i am on the right track here?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:21 am
See my reply above, let me know if it helps
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

Legendary Member
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
Thanked: 114 times
Followed by:12 members

by patanjali.purpose » Sun Mar 18, 2012 12:09 pm
vikram4689 wrote:
patanjali.purpose wrote:
vikram4689 wrote:IMO E, evident by para 3.

You may have been tricked by C and D which are close
C is defied by line 1 of last para and D is incorrect since there was one incident of decreasing whereas D mentions a trend
OA-E;

Can you explain how you eliminated C?
In last 2 lines of para 1, Passage at least 70000 bodies are found in K-Belt and then it categorizes KBO's. In 1st line of last para, passage says K-belt is NOW much smaller than it was. So "at least 70000 figure" may have been reduced to (say) "at least 50000". We do not have any info to identify the at least ____ , we only know that number is reduced.
1st para: LESS well known is the existence of at least 70,000 other small objects orbiting the sun beyond Neptune. These objects are primarily found within Kuiper Belt (NOTE: the use of PRESENT TENSE - this shows minimum of 70,000 objects exist today)

Last para: The Kuiper Belt is actually much smaller than it once was - THE REDUCTION YOU MENTIONED IS with respect to sometime in PAST. The numbers have reduced to atleast 70,000 from an unknown numbers (definitely higher) in the past.

IMO what goes against C is that 'pssg never says whether 70,000 other small objects are actually KBOs"

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Tue Mar 20, 2012 11:42 am
It seems that words "less well known is the existence..." are tying to imply to there is less confidence over statement following it.

Those objects are "at least 70000" are certainly K-belt objects. See last line of 1st para "these objects primarily are found in a ring known as K-belt"
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Ahmedabad
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:10 members

by ronnie1985 » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:47 am
In my opinion (E)as 3rd para specifically says that the objects in question are thrown out of solar system...
Follow your passion, Success as perceived by others shall follow you