Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 24 Jul 2014, 22:49

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Because there are no habitable planets other than Earth in

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Please select your answer

You may select 1 option
Author Message
TAGS:
2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2012
Posts: 64
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [2] , given: 9

Because there are no habitable planets other than Earth in [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 11:18
2
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

58% (03:07) correct 43% (01:59) wrong based on 120 sessions
Because there are no habitable planets other than Earth in our solar system and because it is unlikely we will ever have the capability to reach other systems, the conclusion that humankind will never colonize outer space seems justified. Consider, however, that every planet lies at the bottom of a deep gravity well. It not only takes energy to lift people and material out of such wells; it also takes considerable energy to lower them to the bottom in good working condition. Human beings need air, water, and food, but we need not continue to supply ourselves with these necessities under such inefficient conditions. The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter contains billions of tons of the ices of water, ammonia, and carbon dioxide, everything needed to provide food, air, and water, as well as abundant metals from which to build shelter. And relatively little energy would be required to exploit those vast resources because the asteroids, having little mass individually, do not lie at the bottoms of deep gravity wells. Therefore, human beings do not need to live on planets.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage above?

A) Most human beings are physically unable to withstand acceleration out of gravity wells.
B) Minute amounts of trace elements available only on Earth are required for human subsistence.
C) Human beings are physiologically unable to develop and function properly outside the confines of a strong gravity field.
D) Given current technology, it would take more than eight years to complete a round trip from Earth to the asteroid belt and back.
E)The resources of asteroids are more likely to be exploited by the descendants of colonists from Earth.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by doe007 on 14 May 2013, 20:49, edited 2 times in total.
Topic name updated
Expert Post
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 1057
Location: India
City: Pune
GPA: 3.4
WE: Business Development (Manufacturing)
Followers: 123

Kudos [?]: 754 [0], given: 800

Re: Because there are no habitable planets... [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 12:46
Expert's post
anish123ster wrote:
Because there are no habitable planets other than Earth in our solar system and because it is unlikely we will ever have the capability to reach other systems, the conclusion that humankind will never colonize outer space seems justified. Consider, however, thatevery planet lies at the bottom of a deep gravity well. It not only takes energy to lift people and material out of such wells; it also takes considerable energy to lower them to the bottom in good working condition. Human beings need air, water, and food, but we need not continue to supply ourselves with these necessities under such inefficient conditions. The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter contains billions of tons of the ices of water, ammonia, and carbon dioxide, everything needed to provide food, air, and water, as well as abundant metals from which to build shelter. Andrelatively little energy would be required to exploit those vast resources because the asteroids, having little mass individually, do not lie at the bottoms of deep gravity wells. Therefore, human beings do not need to live on planets.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage above?

A) Most human beings are physically unable to withstand acceleration out of gravity wells.

B) Minute amounts of trace elements available only on Earth are required for human subsistence.

C) Human beings are physiologically unable to develop and function properly outside the confines of a strong gravity field.

D) Given current technology, it would take more than eight years to complete a round trip from Earth to the asteroid belt and back.

E)The resources of asteroids are more likely to be exploited by the descendants of colonists from Earth.

please do explain your answer..



Dear Anish,

An request to you is, do post your questions along with OA's

In your question, Answer should be between A and C (A is my take)

Premise 1 :- Humans have basic needs to survive - Food, Air, Water
Premise 2 :- Relatively little energy would be required to exploit those vast resources because the asteroids, having little mass individually, do not lie at the bottoms of deep gravity wells
Conclusion :- human beings do not need to live on planets.

To weaken the conclusion we need to consider other side of the story. Apart from Food, water, and Air, is there any other condition that forcing humans to stay on the planet?

Counter Premise :- Planet takes considerable energy from gravity wells to lower People and Material to the bottom in good working condition.

Above Counter premise siting that condition. So The choice that would consistent with above premise would weaken the conclusion.

A) This is true and consistent with counter premise.

B) Shell Game Answer. Comparison is not between Earth and Asteroid Belts. It is between Planets (that are under gravity wells) and Asteroid belts (not under gravity wells).

C) Contender

D) Irrelevant

E) Irrelevant

Between A and C, C makes a general statement about limitations of Humans for living beyond gravitational fields, Whereas A provides a specific limitation i.e. Acceleration would be the factor prohibit Humans live on the Asteroid Belts

So i would go with A

Regards,

Narenn
_________________

Be the coolest guy in the MBA Forum - Be a threadmaster!

Have a blog? Feature it on GMAT Club!

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Next Generation GMATClub CATS with Brilliant Analytics.

Need GMAT Book Recommendations? Best GMAT Books


1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2012
Posts: 64
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [1] , given: 9

Re: Because there are no habitable planets... [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 20:47
1
This post received
KUDOS
answer-C

Reason

It is important to first identify the conclusion drawn by the passage. Here, the author concludes that human beings may not need to live on planets. Thus, an answer that challenges this conclusion or an argument on which it is based would weaken the author’s finding. (C) is the credited response since it directly attacks the author’s conclusion by establishing that humans may need to live in an environment with strong gravitational fields (such as planets).

(A) is incorrect.

(A) is incorrect because it does not necessarily challenge the author’s premise since “most” individuals may be able to remain on Earth while others colonize asteroids or other planets.


(B) is incorrect.

(B) does not preclude colonization of other interstellar bodies, since the necessary elements may be capable of transportation with the colonists.

(D) is incorrect.

(D) is irrelevant to the passage, the conclusion, and the premises on which it is based.

(E) is incorrect.

(E) is incorrect, since whether asteroids are exploited by colonists or descendants of colonists is irrelevant to the author’s conclusion that humans may not need to live on planets.

_________________

giving kudos is the best thing you can do for me..

Expert Post
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 1057
Location: India
City: Pune
GPA: 3.4
WE: Business Development (Manufacturing)
Followers: 123

Kudos [?]: 754 [0], given: 800

Re: Because there are no habitable planets... [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 21:56
Expert's post
anish123ster wrote:
A) Most human beings are physically unable to withstand acceleration out of gravity wells.

C) Human beings are physiologically unable to develop and function properly outside the confines of a strong gravity field.


Yeah Anish,

The difference was of Most and All

Thanks,

Narenn
_________________

Be the coolest guy in the MBA Forum - Be a threadmaster!

Have a blog? Feature it on GMAT Club!

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Next Generation GMATClub CATS with Brilliant Analytics.

Need GMAT Book Recommendations? Best GMAT Books


Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Nov 2012
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 6

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Because there are no habitable planets... [#permalink] New post 09 May 2013, 06:08
If the conclusion states that human beings do not need to live on planets, then answer C makes the most sense because it mentions that ALL of human beings are physiologically unable to develop and function properly outside the confines of a strong gravity field.
The correct answer should explain why Humans CANNOT leave planets. This answer C would weaken to conclusion. I think A would weaken as well but not as much as C. I missed the wording so I picked A at first but I think C is correct. What is the official right answer?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 163
Location: Poland
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 67

Re: Because there are no habitable planets... [#permalink] New post 10 May 2013, 03:44
anish123ster wrote:
Because there are no habitable planets other than Earth in our solar system and because it is unlikely we will ever have the capability to reach other systems, the conclusion that humankind will never colonize outer space seems justified. Consider, however, that every planet lies at the bottom of a deep gravity well. It not only takes energy to lift people and material out of such wells; it also takes considerable energy to lower them to the bottom in good working condition. Human beings need air, water, and food, but we need not continue to supply ourselves with these necessities under such inefficient conditions. The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter contains billions of tons of the ices of water, ammonia, and carbon dioxide, everything needed to provide food, air, and water, as well as abundant metals from which to build shelter. And relatively little energy would be required to exploit those vast resources because the asteroids, having little mass individually, do not lie at the bottoms of deep gravity wells. Therefore, human beings do not need to live on planets.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage above?

Let's stick to the highlighted conclusion.
A) Most human beings are physically unable to withstand acceleration out of gravity wells.
Is acceleration the issue here?
B) Minute amounts of trace elements available only on Earth are required for human subsistence.
Can the elements not be provided outside the Earth?
C) Human beings are physiologically unable to develop and function properly outside the confines of a strong gravity field.
The gravity fields exist only on planets and human beings need gravity fields to live.
D) Given current technology, it would take more than eight years to complete a round trip from Earth to the asteroid belt and back.
Irrelevant.
E)The resources of asteroids are more likely to be exploited by the descendants of colonists from Earth.
Out of scope.
_________________

If I answered your question with this post, use the motivating power of kudos!

Re: Because there are no habitable planets...   [#permalink] 10 May 2013, 03:44
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Experts publish their posts in the topic The direction in which the Earth and the other solid planets TomB 5 05 Apr 2012, 08:07
The direction in which the Earth and the other planets - gk3.14 8 03 Sep 2006, 19:30
8 The direction in which the Earth and the other solid planets giddi77 9 12 Apr 2006, 07:13
Madagascar was one of the last habitable areas of the earth nakib77 3 15 Dec 2005, 08:29
For the first time, an earth-like planet has been Bhai 8 10 Sep 2004, 07:21
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Because there are no habitable planets other than Earth in

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.