RC - Meaning of phrase

[karthikpandian19]

In 1958, Jack Kilby invented the integrated circuit and ushered in the modern computer era. For the first time, using a semiconductor substrate, complete electronic circuits could be miniaturized and mass produced, ultimately leading to the advent of affordable consumer electronics. Unlike discrete circuits, integrated circuits contain a large number of transistors over a relatively small area. A greater number of transistors per circuit allows for faster processing speeds and more memory. Since the early 1960s, advances in photolithography and miniaturization have led to a doubling every two years in the number of transistors that can be cheaply placed on a single integrated circuit. In 1970, a typical integrated circuit could hold around two thousand transistors. In 2008, that number reached two billion. This consistent exponential increase in transistors per circuit and the consequent parallel improvement in computer processing speed and memory has been dubbed "Moore's Law" in honor of computer scientist Gordon Moore, the man who identified the trend.

Perhaps the most marvelous aspect of Moore's Law is its consistency. When Moore and other computer scientists identified the trend in 1965, they believed that the steady doubling of transistors per circuit could not continue much longer than roughly ten years. Instead, the pattern has continued through five decades. Though there have been a number of predictions as to when the trend will finally cease, a broad consensus among engineers and scientists asserts that the trends associated with Moore's Law will finally die out just before 2020. According to these same experts, by then transistors will have become so small as to begin approaching the size of atoms, and at that point will no longer be capable of processing basic logic functions integral to a computer's performance.

Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that Moore's Law may continue decades into the future. Futurist and computer scientist Ray Kurzweil points out that the most important trend identified by Moore's Law is not the increasing number of transistors per integrated circuit, but rather the exponential growth in computing power relative to cost. He argues that even if manufacturers reached a natural physical limit for miniaturized and parallel processing integrated circuits, new technologies, such as quantum computers, could maintain power-to-cost ratio aspect of Moore's Law. Given the number of unexpected new technological paradigms that have invalidated predictions of Moore's Law's demise since the 1960s, there is reason to support such a conclusion.

The author mentions "unexpected technological paradigms" at the end of the passage primarily in order to:


(A) bolster the opinion of a Ray Kurzweil regarding the possibility of extending Moore's Law beyond the year 2020

(B) compare Moore's Law to other technological trends from the 1960s on through the 2000s

(C) explain how many engineers and scientists came to conclude Moore's Law would become invalid in the year 2020

(D) describe, in abstract terms, the import of trends similar to Moore's Law

(E) demonstrate the remarkable consistency of Moore's Law when contrasted with other technological developments

[Birottam Dutta]

The correct answer should be A.

The phrase suggests that the many advancements have proved all those wrong who felt that Moore's law would die out quickly.

This is best captured by A.

Hence, A!

Hope this is the correct choice.

[karthikpandian19]

OA is A

[karthikpandian19]

This question asks for the role a particular statement plays in the argument. We should always start by rereading the entire section in question and getting a sense of the context. The wrong answer choices will, for the most part, try to mix ideas from other parts of the passage with the statement in question.

Before the statement in question, the author describes Ray Kurzweil's argument about Moore's Law. He predicts that new technologies will allow the trend of increasingly powerful, yet cheaper, computers to continue. The author then states: there is reason to support such a conclusion. The conclusion in question is Kurzweil's. Therefore, the purpose of the statement in question is to support Kurzweil's argument.

Choice A is correct. This is precisely the purpose of the statement in question. The author says that unexpected technological paradigms...have invalidated predictions of Moore's Law's demise. Kurzweil's prediction is based on this very idea-a new technological paradigm extending the lifespan of Moore's Law.

Choice B is false because there is no comparison in this section of the passage. The author talks only about predictions of Moore's Law's demise, not "other technological trends."

Choice C can be eliminated by evaluating the first verb; the author is not really "explaining" anything here. He is instead supporting Kurzweil's argument by mentioning earlier predictions about Moore's Law. The only possible connection to "many engineers and scientists" is the fact that he is disagreeing with their consensus regarding the end of Moore's Law in 2020. Certainly, this section does not tell us "how" they came to that conclusion.

Choice D brings up an irrelevant topic. The author is not describing trends "similar to Moore's Law." The section only talks about earlier predictions about Moore's Law, not other trends.

Choice E distorts facts from the last paragraph and uses passage wording to seem appealing. The author is not "demonstrating consistency" with the phrase in question; rather, he is citing precedent in a broad fashion in order to bolster a prediction. More importantly, no contrasting "with other technological developments" is done here. The author does not compare Moore's Law to other trends.

In 1958, Jack Kilby invented the integrated circuit and ushered in the modern computer era. For the first time, using a semiconductor substrate, complete electronic circuits could be miniaturized and mass produced, ultimately leading to the advent of affordable consumer electronics. Unlike discrete circuits, integrated circuits contain a large number of transistors over a relatively small area. A greater number of transistors per circuit allows for faster processing speeds and more memory. Since the early 1960s, advances in photolithography and miniaturization have led to a doubling every two years in the number of transistors that can be cheaply placed on a single integrated circuit. In 1970, a typical integrated circuit could hold around two thousand transistors. In 2008, that number reached two billion. This consistent exponential increase in transistors per circuit and the consequent parallel improvement in computer processing speed and memory has been dubbed "Moore's Law" in honor of computer scientist Gordon Moore, the man who identified the trend.

Perhaps the most marvelous aspect of Moore's Law is its consistency. When Moore and other computer scientists identified the trend in 1965, they believed that the steady doubling of transistors per circuit could not continue much longer than roughly ten years. Instead, the pattern has continued through five decades. Though there have been a number of predictions as to when the trend will finally cease, a broad consensus among engineers and scientists asserts that the trends associated with Moore's Law will finally die out just before 2020. According to these same experts, by then transistors will have become so small as to begin approaching the size of atoms, and at that point will no longer be capable of processing basic logic functions integral to a computer's performance.

Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that Moore's Law may continue decades into the future. Futurist and computer scientist Ray Kurzweil points out that the most important trend identified by Moore's Law is not the increasing number of transistors per integrated circuit, but rather the exponential growth in computing power relative to cost. He argues that even if manufacturers reached a natural physical limit for miniaturized and parallel processing integrated circuits, new technologies, such as quantum computers, could maintain power-to-cost ratio aspect of Moore's Law. Given the number of unexpected new technological paradigms that have invalidated predictions of Moore's Law's demise since the 1960s, there is reason to support such a conclusion.

The author mentions "unexpected technological paradigms" at the end of the passage primarily in order to:


(A) bolster the opinion of a Ray Kurzweil regarding the possibility of extending Moore's Law beyond the year 2020

(B) compare Moore's Law to other technological trends from the 1960s on through the 2000s

(C) explain how many engineers and scientists came to conclude Moore's Law would become invalid in the year 2020

(D) describe, in abstract terms, the import of trends similar to Moore's Law

(E) demonstrate the remarkable consistency of Moore's Law when contrasted with other technological developments