OG10 - Astronomy related

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:46 am
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:7 members

OG10 - Astronomy related

by GMATMadeEasy » Sun Jun 19, 2011 7:33 am
A meteor stream is composed of dust particles that have been ejected from a parent comet at a variety of velocities. These particles follow the same orbit as the parent comet, but due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet until a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit. Astronomers have hypothesized that a meteor stream should broaden with time as the dust particles' individual orbits are perturbed by planetary gravitational fields. A recent computer-modeling experiment tested this hypothesis by tracking the influence of planetary gravitation over a projected 5,000-year period on the positions of a group of hypothetical dust particles. In the model, the particles were randomly distributed throughout a computer simulation of the orbit of an actual meteor stream, the Geminid. The researcher found, as expected, that the computer-model stream broadened with time. Conventional theories, however, predicted that the distribution of particles would be increasingly dense toward the center of a meteor stream. Surprisingly, the computer-model meteor stream gradually came to resemble a thick-walled, hollow pipe.

Whenever the Earth passes through a meteor stream, a meteor shower occurs. Moving at a little over 1,500,000 miles per day around its orbit, the Earth would take, on average, just over a day to cross the hollow, computer-model Geminid stream if the stream were 5,000 years old. Two brief periods of peak meteor activity during the shower would be observed, one as the Earth entered the thick-walled "pipe" and one as it exited. There is no reason why the Earth should always pass through the stream's exact center, so the time interval between the two bursts of activity would vary from one year to the next.

Has the predicted twin-peaked activity been observed for the actual yearly Geminid meteor shower? The Geminid data between 1970 and 1979 shows just such a bifurcation, a secondary burst of meteor activity being clearly visible at an average of 19 hours (1,200,000 miles) after the first burst. The time intervals between the bursts suggest the actual Geminid stream is about 3,000 years old.

Q : According to the passage, why do the dust particles in a meteor stream eventually surround a comet's original orbit?
(A) They are ejected by the comet at differing velocities.
(B) Their orbits are uncontrolled by planetary gravitational fields.
(C) They become part of the meteor stream at different times.
(D) Their velocity slows over time.
(E) Their ejection velocity is slower than that of the comet.

OA is A

Could an expert suggest how we can get to the right answer choice here. I could not find the support for A. I have put in bold the relevant text but it nowhere asserts a causal relation ship between meteor stream eventually surround a comet's original orbit and its ejection by the comet at differing velocities .
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:19 pm
Thanked: 15 times

by MM_Ed » Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:11 pm
due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet until a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit
The dust cloud is caused by an accumulation of particles ejected at various velocities.

If they didn't have different velocities, the particles would simply form a dust cloud around the comet that travelled with it, not one that covered the entire orbit.

It's not 'D' because a body in motion does not slow down in the absence of external unbalanced forces. 'D' works in the atmosphere, but not in space.
If you found one of my answers useful, hit the shiny Thanks button! : )

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:59 am
they actually *do* spell out the causal relationship, quite explicitly:
GMATMadeEasy wrote:A meteor stream is composed of dust particles that have been ejected from a parent comet at a variety of velocities. These particles follow the same orbit as the parent comet, but due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet until a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit.
red = cause
... due to red, blue = effect.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Legendary Member
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:46 am
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:7 members

by GMATMadeEasy » Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:32 am
lunarpower wrote:they actually *do* spell out the causal relationship, quite explicitly:
GMATMadeEasy wrote:A meteor stream is composed of dust particles that have been ejected from a parent comet at a variety of velocities. These particles follow the same orbit as the parent comet, but due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet until a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit.
red = cause
... due to red, blue = effect.
Effect part -> due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet until a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit

I read it in two parts:

1. Due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet
2. UNTIL a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit

Part 1 is clearly causal relationship but part2 is also result of the cause in red?Part 2 is something that limits the part1 (effect) after a certain point - that is when the entire commetary orbit is surpunded by dust.

Also, How one could deal with UNTIL sentences effectively?

Example from a RC in OG10:

In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company's stock should be forced to give the public one day's notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies' productivity.

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Fri Jun 24, 2011 3:54 am
GMATMadeEasy wrote:I read it in two parts:

1. Due to their differing velocities they slowly gain on or fall behind the disintegrating comet
2. UNTIL a shroud of dust surrounds the entire cometary orbit
this interpretation doesn't make sense; it implies that a shroud of dust surrounds the comet completely at random, or for some reason that is left unspecified in the passage.

you should be able to pick up on the fact that these things ARE the reasons why the shroud of dust surrounds the comet. in fact, even if you have trouble making this realization at first, you can notice that the question asks for the reason!
if the reason were not stated in the passage, then this question would be impossible to answer.
Also, How one could deal with UNTIL sentences effectively?
... as with so many other things on the verbal section, you have to use common sense.

for instance:
james pounded the wall repeatedly with his fist, until it was full of holes.
--> here, the holes in the wall are caused by the punching; this sentence obviously does *not* mean that james pounded the wall until it suddenly became full of holes for some other reason.
(this is like the sentence in the passage)

but...
james sat in the chair, eating junk food and watching movies, until he fell asleep
--> in this case, james didn't fall asleep because he was sitting in the chair and eating junk food. in this case, the sentence just means that he did these things until he (randomly) fell asleep.

if you are looking for precise rules here, then you are out of luck. there are no rules that can replace real-world intuition / common sense!

if you treat reading comprehension as though it's a math problem, you are going to be in some seriously big trouble.
Example from a RC in OG10:

In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company's stock should be forced to give the public one day's notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies' productivity.
is this supposed to be an example of "until"?
i don't see "until" here.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Legendary Member
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:46 am
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:7 members

by GMATMadeEasy » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:55 am
this interpretation doesn't make sense; it implies that a shroud of dust surrounds the comet completely at random, or for some reason that is left unspecified in the passage.
You have replied me very precisly here and this is what I wanted i inferred and wanted to confirm that my way of thinking is correct.
you should be able to pick up on the fact that these things ARE the reasons why the shroud of dust surrounds the comet. in fact, even if you have trouble making this realization at first, you can notice that the question asks for the reason!
if the reason were not stated in the passage, then this question would be impossible to answer.
As one of your ardent follower, i go through almost all of your Thursday vidoes and, recently, in your infer part2 RC thursday video you have impressively addressed the issue above.Since then , I am trying to incorporate this thing in my normal way of doing such RCs. But will come soon with some more pratise I guess. A new skill to learn might be easy but unlearn something takes a while :).

Thanks for highlighting the fact.
Quote:
Example from a RC in OG10:

In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company's stock should be forced to give the public one day's notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies' productivity.is this supposed to be an example of "until"?
i don't see "until" here.
I suppose i am not very clear here. Let's call it problem of comprehension. My question is for unless infact. And I tried to find a way out for this to simplify this in my head.

Unless can be replaced by if not in the sentences ? I am doing this so i understand the meaning of a sentence containing unless andnot mixed together with little complicate sentence structure.

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:47 am
GMATMadeEasy wrote:Unless can be replaced by if not in the sentences ?
this substitution should work, yes.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron