Leibniz vs Newton...!!!

[killer1387]

Historian: Leibniz, the seventeenth-century philosopher, published his version of calculus before Newton did. But then Newton revealed his private notebooks, which showed he had been using these ideas for at least a decade before Leibniz's publication. Newton also claimed that he had disclosed these ideas to Leibniz in a letter shortly before Leibniz's publication. Yet close examination of the letter shows that Newton's few cryptic remarks did not reveal anything important about calculus. Thus, Leibniz and Newton each independently discovered calculus.
Which one of the following is an assumption required by the historian's argument?

A. Leibniz did not tell anyone about calculus prior to publishing his version of it.
B. No third person independently discovered calculus prior to Newton and Leibniz.
C. Newton believed that Leibniz was able to learn something important about calculus from his letter to him.
D. Neither Newton nor Leibniz knew that the other had developed a version of calculus prior to Leibniz's publication.
E. Neither Newton nor Leibniz learned crucial details about calculus from some third source.

Guys give it a try. OA E to follow post some discussions.

[avik.ch]

IMO : E

But B was a good trap !!

[killer1387]

IMO : E

But B was a good trap !!

Could you please elaborate the logic behind your pick.

thnx

[avik.ch]

Leibniz, the seventeenth-century philosopher, published his version of calculus before Newton did. But then Newton revealed his private notebooks, which showed he had been using these ideas for at least a decade before Leibniz's publication. Newton also claimed that he had disclosed these ideas to Leibniz in a letter shortly before Leibniz's publication. - facts
Yet close examination of the letter shows that Newton's few cryptic remarks did not reveal anything important about calculus. - premise
Thus, Leibniz and Newton each independently discovered calculus. - conclusion

L and N both independently discovered calculus ----> as N's letter did not reveal anything to L about calculus.

Now here there is a change in scope -

discovering independently --- > letter not revealing anything.

Anything that will connect this two or will negate anything that will weaken this statement by bringing this scope change.

E does that : by negating the weaken scenario that stands for the scope change.

A - irrelevant
B - The stimulus talks about only N and L, so X,Y,,....are not in the scope of the argument.

I think all other answer choices are tangent to the correct one.


Hope this helps !!

[GmatKiss]

D/E, E is better!