It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 19 Jan 2017, 05:11

# STARTING SOON:

Live Chat with Admission Manager and Current Student of NUS SIngapore - Join Chat Room to Participate.

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 276
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Other
GPA: 2.44
WE: Project Management (Telecommunications)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 734 [2] , given: 325

It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2013, 15:19
2
KUDOS
6
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (02:36) correct 49% (01:27) wrong based on 440 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause the fusion of magnesium with hydrogen, creating a chemically stable aluminum. Since aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth, it can be inferred that, at least at some point, the temperature inside or outside Earth was comparable to that on large stars or supernovae.

Which of the following, if true, causes most damage to the conclusion of the argument above?

(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2012
Posts: 174
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 28 [2] , given: 559

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2013, 20:31
2
KUDOS
guerrero25 wrote:
It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause the fusion of magnesium with hydrogen, creating a chemically stable aluminum. Since aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth, it can be inferred that, at least at some point, the temperature inside or outside Earth was comparable to that on large stars or supernovae.

Which of the following, if true, causes most damage to the conclusion of the argument above?

(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.

IMO (D)
(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.Out of scope

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.-Out of scope

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.-Out of scope

Down to (B) and (D)
"Since aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth"-Even if some of the aluminium was bought by asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae- what about the major part of it.??

Now analyzing (D)
we have to weaken that temperature on earth was almost the same as that of stars or supernova...means if thats the case the aluminium found on Earth should not be chemically stable.. (D) clearly says that...
_________________

Preparing for another shot...

Manager
Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 127
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 110

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2013, 20:36
guerrero25 wrote:
It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause the fusion of magnesium with hydrogen, creating a chemically stable aluminum. Since aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth, it can be inferred that, at least at some point, the temperature inside or outside Earth was comparable to that on large stars or supernovae.

Which of the following, if true, causes most damage to the conclusion of the argument above?

(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.

What is OA? Confused between C and D..will go with C though.

Conclusion : the temperature inside or outside Earth was comparable to that on large stars or supernovae

(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.
Incorrect..It talks about contemporary earth, so still the temperature could have been like star in the past

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.
this give reason only for 'some' of AL, we are concerned for large quantities of AL.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.
since native AL can be found only in low O2 env and it also contain O2..there is high chance that it was imported or there is some other process which may not require high temp..still not 100% sure

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.
Here there is an additional process explained for AL to be chemically stable which may require intense heat. this infact supports the conclusion

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.
Out of scope. We have no idea or concern on how Mg is formed.
_________________

“Confidence comes not from always being right but from not fearing to be wrong.”

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1153
Location: United States
Followers: 259

Kudos [?]: 2867 [1] , given: 123

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2013, 22:15
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
This question requires you to read it carefully.

ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:

Fact: The heat of large stars or supernovae ==> the fusion of magnesium with hydrogen ==> creating a chemically stable aluminum. KEY word: "STABLE aluminum". Not aluminum in general.
Fact: Aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth,
Conclusion: At least at some point, the temperature inside or outside Earth was comparable to that on large stars or supernovae.

Question: Which of the following, if true, causes most damage to the conclusion of the argument above?

(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.
Wrong. "not typical of contemporary Earth" does not mean the creating of stable aluminum did not happen in the past.

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.
Wrong. "Some" does not mean "all". Let say 1/2 of the aluminum was brought to the Earth by asteroid, other 1/2 of aluminum created by temperature inside or outside Earth ==> The conclusion is true.
Other reason to eliminate: B only talks about "aluminum", not "STABLE aluminum" ==> We can't say anything about the creating of stable aluminum on Earth.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.
Wrong. Out of scope.

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.
Correct. D shows that STABLE aluminum can be created artificially on Earth, not by temperature inside or outside Earth.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.
Wrong. E supports the conclusion a bit.

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 118
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 118

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 05:51
How is C out of scope? Can anyone explain in detail?
My reasoning:
The argument says that high heat or supernova temperature inside or outside the Earth is responsible for the creation of aluminium but C says that aluminium is present in low oxygen areas, maybe the presence of low oxygen area has an affect and this makes aluminium. This can be an alternate cause.
Where am I wrong?
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3089
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6524 [1] , given: 1012

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 09:25
1
KUDOS
mahendru1992 wrote:
How is C out of scope? Can anyone explain in detail?
My reasoning:
The argument says that high heat or supernova temperature inside or outside the Earth is responsible for the creation of aluminium but C says that aluminium is present in low oxygen areas, maybe the presence of low oxygen area has an affect and this makes aluminium. This can be an alternate cause.
Where am I wrong?

simply because the gist of the argument says this: aluminum is the result of fusion at certain point on a time line and this process is equal to that on other planets
this is false: to have aluminium we have to do something of artificial in a siderurgic plant

C says: where the aluminum WHERE is founded............is completely unrelated to weaken the conclusion

hope this shelps you

by the way: do you agree that it is a 700 level question ?? please let me know
_________________
Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 118
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 57 [1] , given: 118

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 10:40
1
KUDOS
carcass wrote:
mahendru1992 wrote:
How is C out of scope? Can anyone explain in detail?
My reasoning:
The argument says that high heat or supernova temperature inside or outside the Earth is responsible for the creation of aluminium but C says that aluminium is present in low oxygen areas, maybe the presence of low oxygen area has an affect and this makes aluminium. This can be an alternate cause.
Where am I wrong?

simply because the gist of the argument says this: aluminum is the result of fusion at certain point on a time line and this process is equal to that on other planets
this is false: to have aluminium we have to do something of artificial in a siderurgic plant

C says: where the aluminum WHERE is founded............is completely unrelated to weaken the conclusion

hope this shelps you

by the way: do you agree that it is a 700 level question ?? please let me know

Thanks now i understand my mistake. Ahmm and about the difficulty level of the question, well i'm not sure I'm the right guy to ask since I'm not really good at CR. But IMO it is a near 700 level question
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3089
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6524 [0], given: 1012

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 10:43
mahendru1992 wrote:
carcass wrote:
mahendru1992 wrote:
How is C out of scope? Can anyone explain in detail?
My reasoning:
The argument says that high heat or supernova temperature inside or outside the Earth is responsible for the creation of aluminium but C says that aluminium is present in low oxygen areas, maybe the presence of low oxygen area has an affect and this makes aluminium. This can be an alternate cause.
Where am I wrong?

simply because the gist of the argument says this: aluminum is the result of fusion at certain point on a time line and this process is equal to that on other planets
this is false: to have aluminium we have to do something of artificial in a siderurgic plant

C says: where the aluminum WHERE is founded............is completely unrelated to weaken the conclusion

hope this shelps you

by the way: do you agree that it is a 700 level question ?? please let me know

Thanks now i understand my mistake. Ahmm and about the difficulty level of the question, well i'm not sure I'm the right guy to ask since I'm not really good at CR. But IMO it is a near 700 level question

infact it was a rethoric question to you but also to other students
_________________
Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 118
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 118

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 10:51
carcass wrote:

by the way: do you agree that it is a 700 level question ?? please let me know
infact it was a rethoric question to you but also to other students

hahaha damn! well that did it

P.S Do you have some tips on how to score well in the CR Section. Because I'm consistently performing poor. I get around 2/5 700 level questions correct. How do I improve? Really frustrated
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3089
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6524 [0], given: 1012

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 11:31
mahendru1992 wrote:
carcass wrote:

by the way: do you agree that it is a 700 level question ?? please let me know
infact it was a rethoric question to you but also to other students

hahaha damn! well that did it

P.S Do you have some tips on how to score well in the CR Section. Because I'm consistently performing poor. I get around 2/5 700 level questions correct. How do I improve? Really frustrated

and easiest question ?' what is your rate ??
_________________
Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 118
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 118

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 11:36
carcass wrote:
and easiest question ?' what is your rate ??
[/quote][/quote]

Well on an average 4/5 mostly 5/5. But the problem lies with the 700 level questions.
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3089
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6524 [1] , given: 1012

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 11:45
1
KUDOS
mahendru1992 wrote:
carcass wrote:
and easiest question ?' what is your rate ??
[/quote]

Well on an average 4/5 mostly 5/5. But the problem lies with the 700 level questions.[/quote]

well i do not see the problem, to some extent.

I mean: people think that this is just a test about how many difficult questions i pick right ?? yeah, but this is wrong

The test is really complex. The most part of the students not even see that level because a bunch of variables come into the picture : stress, timing, even a word that is not understood and you have difficulties with that question, even if that question is not a 700 level.

The key is to pick right each low middle and middle upper level. in that way you are in an upper level stage that if you pick a 700 level question this one hurts you less than a 500 level. this is the game.

Back to your specific question I would say: read verey super carefully the question, trying to make it own as you are in that scenario and from here move further through the answer choices. Understanding the whole picture and not to use only your sets of strategy: for weaken question i have to weaken only the conclusion: this is fasle. understanding the whole scenario is the first rule to follow.

hope this helps you
_________________
Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 118
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 118

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 11:50
Quote:

Well on an average 4/5 mostly 5/5. But the problem lies with the 700 level questions.

well i do not see the problem, to some extent.

I mean: people think that this is just a test about how many difficult questions i pick right ?? yeah, but this is wrong

The test is really complex. The most part of the students not even see that level because a bunch of variables come into the picture : stress, timing, even a word that is not understood and you have difficulties with that question, even if that question is not a 700 level.

The key is to pick right each low middle and middle upper level. in that way you are in an upper level stage that if you pick a 700 level question this one hurts you less than a 500 level. this is the game.

Back to your specific question I would say: read verey super carefully the question, trying to make it own as you are in that scenario and from here move further through the answer choices. Understanding the whole picture and not to use only your sets of strategy: for weaken question i have to weaken only the conclusion: this is fasle. understanding the whole scenario is the first rule to follow.

hope this helps you

Thanks for the advice carcass. I was always under the assumption that I had to score all 700 level questions to get a good score
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3089
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6524 [2] , given: 1012

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 11:59
2
KUDOS
the test works more or less like this:

questions one through six or so are of an increasing level

7 ---> 10 are difficult. this because the test tries to set a plateau for each student.

after this the test goes up and down from this plateau; it depends on how you respond to those questions.

around 25 or so (more or less) there is the confirmation stage: where your score is confirmed by the tes itself.

as you can see whwnever you reach THAT plateau after the 10th question if you are in an upper level zone even with question picked wrong you have that score.

coverserly: if you are not able to reach that plateau no matter what you do well AFTER, your score is already that. period.

I would be worried about more to have a strong plateau instead to pick a 700 level right and all the rest wrong; even becasue if you do not reach that upper level stage you never see a 700 level.

All that doesn't mean that 700 level question are not important, this is not true at all. only that for how the test works they are a chimera if you do not do well BEFORE.

_________________
Manager
Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 130
Schools: IIMA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 66

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2014, 04:39
Indeed a good question, key to solve this question is "STABLE aluminum" -D says earth does not have stable aluminium it has to modify etc............so it says stable aluminium was never exist in earth --->i.e. earth will not be having similar environment of heat of large stars or supernovae

Hope that helps
_________________

If you are not over prepared then you are under prepared !!!

Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 204
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 49

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2015, 06:47
guerrero25 wrote:
It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause the fusion of magnesium with hydrogen, creating a chemically stable aluminum. Since aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth, it can be inferred that, at least at some point, the temperature inside or outside Earth was comparable to that on large stars or supernovae.

Which of the following, if true, causes most damage to the conclusion of the argument above?

(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth.

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions.

B is tempting but in B if some aluminum was brought by asteroids then what about the left aluminum.
SVP
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2187
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Stanford '19 (S)
GMAT 1: 560 Q42 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q39 V27
GMAT 3: 560 Q43 V24
GMAT 4: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 140

Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Dec 2015, 20:18
(A)Creation of stable aluminum requires distinct pressure conditions not typical of contemporary Earth. - irrelevant

(B)Some of the aluminum found on Earth was brought here with asteroids or other cosmic bodies that were parts of large stars or supernovae. - some - but what about the other part? where did it come from? out.

(C)Most aluminum on Earth comes in oxides, and native aluminum can be found only in low oxygen environments.
still doesn't explain where it came from. is oxides different from native aluminium? since additional questions need to be answered, it can't be a correct answer.

(D)Aluminum found on Earth has several vacant electrons that have to be artificially removed in order for it to become chemically stable.
ok, now this is interesting. this one says that aluminium on earth has different structure than the aluminium formed in supernova. thus, the conclusion no longer stands.

(E)Magnesium itself can only be formed under strictly defined conditions. - irrelevant
Re: It takes the heat of large stars or supernovae to cause   [#permalink] 30 Dec 2015, 20:18
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Exposure to a large dose of something that causes bodily damage 1 03 Jun 2016, 05:55
2 Large national budget deficits do not cause large trade 2 23 Aug 2012, 23:35
11 Large national budget deficits do not cause large trade 11 23 Jul 2010, 02:52
9 Large national budget deficits do not cause large trade 10 27 Oct 2009, 05:02
Large national budget deficits do not cause large trade 6 18 Jul 2008, 08:58
Display posts from previous: Sort by