GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 10 Dec 2018, 07:20

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
Events & Promotions in December
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2526272829301
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
303112345
Open Detailed Calendar
  • Free lesson on number properties

     December 10, 2018

     December 10, 2018

     10:00 PM PST

     11:00 PM PST

    Practice the one most important Quant section - Integer properties, and rapidly improve your skills.
  • Free GMAT Prep Hour

     December 11, 2018

     December 11, 2018

     09:00 PM EST

     10:00 PM EST

    Strategies and techniques for approaching featured GMAT topics. December 11 at 9 PM EST.

A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Dec 2014
Posts: 66
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
Schools: Duke '21
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.8
WE: Other (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jul 2018, 23:54
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

64% (01:46) correct 36% (02:07) wrong based on 124 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

12. A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found evidence of cobalt, suggesting the use of cobalt blue, a pigment not used in Europe before 1804. The painting was thus deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804. A 2009 analysis also found cobalt, but that analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the information above?

(A) The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.

(B) The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.

(C) The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.

(D) Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.

(E) New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.

Official LSAT

_________________

Kudo is nothing but encouragement!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 17 Jan 2017
Posts: 300
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2018, 00:46
2
LeoGT wrote:
12. A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found evidence of cobalt, suggesting the use of cobalt blue, a pigment not used in Europe before 1804. The painting was thus deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804. A 2009 analysis also found cobalt, but that analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the information above?

(A) The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.

(B) The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.

(C) The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.

(D) Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.

(E) New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.

Official LSAT


(A) The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.
- Incorrect.This doesn't help in resolving the discrepancy

(B) The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.
- Correct.This tells us that the equipment used in 1995 was not as advanced as the one in 2009. Hence the equipment of 1955 could have missed something.

(C) The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.
-Incorrect. More samples doesn't mean they found something else

(D) Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.
-Incorrect. Expert insight doesn't prove

(E) New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.

- Irrelevant

Kudos please, if you like the explanation

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Only those who risk going too far, can possibly find out how far one can go

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Dec 2014
Posts: 66
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
Schools: Duke '21
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.8
WE: Other (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2018, 00:59
Akash720 wrote:
LeoGT wrote:
12. A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found evidence of cobalt, suggesting the use of cobalt blue, a pigment not used in Europe before 1804. The painting was thus deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804. A 2009 analysis also found cobalt, but that analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the information above?

(A) The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.

(B) The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.

(C) The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.

(D) Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.

(E) New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.

Official LSAT


(A) The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.
- Incorrect.This doesn't help in resolving the discrepancy

(B) The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.
- Correct.This tells us that the equipment used in 1995 was not as advanced as the one in 2009. Hence the equipment of 1955 could have missed something.

(C) The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.
-Incorrect. More samples doesn't mean they found something else

(D) Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.
-Incorrect. Expert insight doesn't prove

(E) New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.

- Irrelevant

Kudos please, if you like the explanation

Posted from my mobile device


I'm afraid answer B cannot explain the discrepancy.
Key point of the argument is:
- 1995 found combat in painting. Combat is not used until 1804.
Discrepancy: Evidence suggests that painting is produced after 1804.
But 2009 analysis suggest the painting is produced before 1804.
Assumption of 1905 is combat must be use at the time the painting is created.

B says techique in 2009 can detect smaller amount. Both can detect combalt.
_________________

Kudo is nothing but encouragement!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 17 Jan 2017
Posts: 300
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2018, 01:30
LeoGT wrote:

I'm afraid answer B cannot explain the discrepancy.
Key point of the argument is:
- 1995 found combat in painting. Combat is not used until 1804.
Discrepancy: Evidence suggests that painting is produced after 1804.
But 2009 analysis suggest the painting is produced before 1804.
Assumption of 1905 is combat must be use at the time the painting is created.

B says techique in 2009 can detect smaller amount. Both can detect combalt.


Hi Leo,

As per my understanding, the answer should resolve the discrepancy between two statements i.e.,
1) The 1955 analysis suggested that the painting was deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804
2) The 2009 analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804

Option B here, suggests that 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis. What we can assume from this statement is, the equipment of 1955 analysis was not good enough to detect smaller amounts of cobalt which would have given more information about the painting, but the equipment of 2009 analysis is sophisticated, can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt which provides more information about the painting. The additional information can be an evidence of the painting produced before 1804.

This is my understanding. An expert comment can clear the doubt probably
_________________

Only those who risk going too far, can possibly find out how far one can go

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Dec 2014
Posts: 66
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
Schools: Duke '21
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.8
WE: Other (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2018, 01:40
Akash720 wrote:
LeoGT wrote:

I'm afraid answer B cannot explain the discrepancy.
Key point of the argument is:
- 1995 found combat in painting. Combat is not used until 1804.
Discrepancy: Evidence suggests that painting is produced after 1804.
But 2009 analysis suggest the painting is produced before 1804.
Assumption of 1905 is combat must be use at the time the painting is created.

B says techique in 2009 can detect smaller amount. Both can detect combalt.


Hi Leo,

As per my understanding, the answer should resolve the discrepancy between two statements i.e.,
1) The 1955 analysis suggested that the painting was deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804
2) The 2009 analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804

Option B here, suggests that 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis. What we can assume from this statement is, the equipment of 1955 analysis was not good enough to detect smaller amounts of cobalt which would have given more information about the painting, but the equipment of 2009 analysis is sophisticated, can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt which provides more information about the painting. The additional information can be an evidence of the painting produced before 1804.

This is my understanding. An expert comment can clear the doubt probably



Hi Akash720
Thanks for sharing your opinion. However, there is too many gaps in your reasoning. Here it is:
"Option B here, suggests that 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis. What we can assume from this statement is, the equipment of 1955 analysis was not good enough to detect smaller amounts of cobalt which would have given more information about the painting, but the equipment of 2009 analysis is sophisticated, can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt which provides more information about the painting. The additional information can be an evidence of the painting produced before 1804"

The red part is just your assumption. It cannot solve problem.
Analogy:
My ESR GMAT report includes a news part which just appear 01/07/2018.
Conclution: I must take the exam after 01/07/2018
Reasoning in the question same here. I took before 01/07/2018 and the new part is added by GMAC after 01/07/2018.
_________________

Kudo is nothing but encouragement!

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Dec 2014
Posts: 66
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
Schools: Duke '21
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.8
WE: Other (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2018, 01:59
Akash720 wrote:
LeoGT wrote:

I'm afraid answer B cannot explain the discrepancy.
Key point of the argument is:
- 1995 found combat in painting. Combat is not used until 1804.
Discrepancy: Evidence suggests that painting is produced after 1804.
But 2009 analysis suggest the painting is produced before 1804.
Assumption of 1905 is combat must be use at the time the painting is created.

B says techique in 2009 can detect smaller amount. Both can detect combalt.


Hi Leo,

As per my understanding, the answer should resolve the discrepancy between two statements i.e.,
1) The 1955 analysis suggested that the painting was deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804
2) The 2009 analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804

Option B here, suggests that 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis. What we can assume from this statement is, the equipment of 1955 analysis was not good enough to detect smaller amounts of cobalt which would have given more information about the painting, but the equipment of 2009 analysis is sophisticated, can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt which provides more information about the painting. The additional information can be an evidence of the painting produced before 1804.

This is my understanding. An expert comment can clear the doubt probably


Even If your assumption is right, it cannot clear the irony. I still can say i do not care your new technique. I found combat, and combat is used after 1804. So i conclude the painting is produced after 1804.

Your reasoning is same as:
Teacher say that my gmat is low because i'm lazzy.
I say: but I leart from gmat club.
Here, i dont attact the argument i'm lazzy. Same as your reasoning.
_________________

Kudo is nothing but encouragement!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 17 Jan 2017
Posts: 300
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2018, 02:19
LeoGT wrote:

Your reasoning is same as:
Teacher say that my gmat is low because i'm lazzy.
I say: but I leart from gmat club.
Here, i dont attact the argument i'm lazzy. Same as your reasoning.


Looks like I misunderstood option A. Now when I read the options again considering B is wrong, I get that Option A is the right answer.

Option A states that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer. This clears our discrepancy as this proves Cobalt is just a layer on the painting hinting that painting could have been created way before and it doesn't matter from when people started using cobalt. Hence falsifying first conclusion.
_________________

Only those who risk going too far, can possibly find out how far one can go

Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 520
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2018, 11:56
A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found evidence of cobalt, suggesting the use of cobalt blue, a pigment not used in Europe before 1804. The painting was thus deemed to have been produced sometime after 1804. A 2009 analysis also found cobalt, but that analysis suggested that the painting might have been produced before 1804.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the information above?

(A) The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.Correct explaination Baba.

(B) The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.the quantity is irrelevant.

(C) The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.
the question is not abt accuracy of the tests,but is about the use of cobalt blue.both T1 and T2 prove it to be there.

(D) Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.

out of scope Baba

(E) New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.after the time window.so out of scope.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden &nbs [#permalink] 10 Sep 2018, 11:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an Italian painting found eviden

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


Copyright

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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.