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

It is currently 01 Oct 2014, 00:23

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

The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 267
Location: California
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 04 Jan 2007, 13:25
also, if u apply the idea of negation.. E comes out good.. if you can predict rings lost due to temp, then arguments does not hold...

i think A is talking about the growth of rings, not the decrease.. so it should anyways not work..

OA is wrong..
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 394
Location: Boston, MA
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 06 Jan 2007, 09:49
I disagree. I stand by A, here's why:

The arguments conclusion is that if the temperature NEVER gets above 95 degrees then the number of rings is an accurace prediction of the tree's age.

(E) says that:
The number of rings that will be lost when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit is not predictable

No one cares about what happens when the temp gets over 95 degrees, the arguments scope is only below 95 degrees.

A is right because if there is another factor that the author did not consider in predicting the tree's age -- PRECIPITATION -- then the argument falls apart and this has to be our assumption.

Its not a great question IMO, but I stick to my guns with A.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 908
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Explain this [#permalink] New post 06 Jan 2007, 11:57
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by counting the number of internal rings in its trunk is generally true. However, to help regulate the internal temperature of the tree, the outermost layers of wood of the Brazilian ash often peel away when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit, leaving the tree with fewer rings than it would otherwise have. So if the temperature in the Brazilian ash's environment never exceeded 95 degrees Fahrenheit, its rings would be a reliable measure of the tree's age.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) The growth of new rings in a tree is not a function of levels of precipitation.
(B) Only the Brazilian ash loses rings because of excessive heat.
(C) Only one day of temperatures above 95 degrees Fahrenheit is needed to cause the Brazilian ash to lose a ring.
(D) The internal rings of all trees are of uniform thickness.
(E) The number of rings that will be lost when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit is not predictable


A and E both seem correct but still a bit confusing........

A. If more percipatation => more rings. then age of the tree according to the rings is misleading because the tree has one ring/year. therefore, percipatation shouldnot cause to have more rings.

E. if we know the number of rings lost due to the tempreture that exceeds 95 degrees fahrenheight, then still we can identify the age of the tree and the lost rings have no effect in finding the age of the tree. so if temp>95 and we donot know the lost rings, it is not possible to find the age of the tree. otherwise, yes. the passage says that if there were no temp >95, the no of rings are reliable measure of tree's age. even if there were temp>95 and we donot know the lost rings because of temp>95, then the no of rings are not reasonable measure of the tree's age.
Director
Director
User avatar
Affiliations: FRM Charter holder
Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 736
Schools: Stanford, Chicago Booth, Babson College
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 4

 [#permalink] New post 07 Jan 2007, 05:09
If the number of rings that will be lost when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit is predictable, then tree's age can be determined by counting the number of internal rings.

Hence, I think the anwer is E.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 24 Nov 2006
Posts: 352
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Explain this [#permalink] New post 07 Jan 2007, 08:34
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by counting the number of internal rings in its trunk is generally true. However, to help regulate the internal temperature of the tree, the outermost layers of wood of the Brazilian ash often peel away when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit, leaving the tree with fewer rings than it would otherwise have. So if the temperature in the Brazilian ash's environment never exceeded 95 degrees Fahrenheit, its rings would be a reliable measure of the tree's age.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
(A) The growth of new rings in a tree is not a function of levels of precipitation.
(B) Only the Brazilian ash loses rings because of excessive heat.
(C) Only one day of temperatures above 95 degrees Fahrenheit is needed to cause the Brazilian ash to lose a ring.
(D) The internal rings of all trees are of uniform thickness.
(E) The number of rings that will be lost when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit is not predictable


The key concept in the conclusion is reliable measure given the temperature doesn´t exceed 95 F. Which is the only answer choice that addresses it? A. E is the 2nd best, although it is out of scope bc it deals w/ an scenario not contemplated in the conclusion (T > 95 F).
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 24 Nov 2006
Posts: 352
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Explain this [#permalink] New post 07 Jan 2007, 08:35
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by counting the number of internal rings in its trunk is generally true. However, to help regulate the internal temperature of the tree, the outermost layers of wood of the Brazilian ash often peel away when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit, leaving the tree with fewer rings than it would otherwise have. So if the temperature in the Brazilian ash's environment never exceeded 95 degrees Fahrenheit, its rings would be a reliable measure of the tree's age.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
(A) The growth of new rings in a tree is not a function of levels of precipitation.
(B) Only the Brazilian ash loses rings because of excessive heat.
(C) Only one day of temperatures above 95 degrees Fahrenheit is needed to cause the Brazilian ash to lose a ring.
(D) The internal rings of all trees are of uniform thickness.
(E) The number of rings that will be lost when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit is not predictable


The key concept in the conclusion is reliable measure given the temperature doesn´t exceed 95 F. Which is the only answer choice that addresses it? A. E is the 2nd best, although it is out of scope bc it deals w/ an scenario not contemplated in the conclusion (T > 95 F).
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 73
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 01 Sep 2007, 15:17
ggarr wrote:
Swagatalakshmi,

Can we have the OR (official reasoning)?


for all who are interested: here is OR for OA:

(E) CORRECT. The conclusion is that the rings will be a reliable measure only if the temperature never exceeds 95 degrees. This is true only if there is no way to predict how many rings would be lost when the temperature does exceed 95 degrees. (If it were possible to predict this, one might be able to assess the age of a tree using its rings even if the temperature had exceeded 95 degrees.)

however i also think this question is strange... i also can live with answer choice C since the author says "never exceeds 95 degrees", i.e. there is an assumption that an exceeding at one day is enough...
  [#permalink] 01 Sep 2007, 15:17
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Popular notions about migration to the United States from Rock750 3 22 Apr 2013, 01:51
1 Experts publish their posts in the topic The popular belief that a snake's age can be determined by Vercules 2 19 Feb 2013, 12:21
8 The popular notion that a tree s age can be determined by ksp 15 24 Nov 2011, 00:53
3 The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by hogann 35 13 Oct 2009, 05:54
The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by lionheart187 4 09 Jun 2008, 19:37
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 27 posts ] 



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®.