Q1:
A. support for a claim about magnesium silicate perovskite's tightly packed geometry
What claim was made about mag. silicate's tightly packed geometry? A fact is given: 'since m.s. perovskite has a tightly packed geometry that seemed to maximize the mass per unit volume,' and a prediction (highlighted sentence) is given after the fact. But apart from that, no claim is made about it's tightly packed geometry.
B. a premise supporting the claim that scientists made an incorrect assumption about the abundance of heavy elements within the perovskite
Firstly, the highlighted sentence doesn't really support the scientist's assumption that the greater abundance of heavy elements within the crystal must explain the higher density. It's a prediction that was taken before the results were revealed. Secondly, the highlighted sentence doesn't support the claim that the scientists made an incorrect assumption.
C. an explanation for the fact that a certain scientific assumption was found to be problematic
The assumption that the 'greater abundance of heavy elements within the crystal must explain the higher density' was found to be problematic. But the highlighted sentence doesn't explain the above assumption. The latter was the assumption before the seismic measurement was taken, the former was the new assumption assigned given the surprising results.
D. a description of a prediction for which the preceding statement about magnesium silicate perovskite provides the grounds
The "higher pressures in this bottommost layer were not expected to change the perovskite's geometry". That's a prediction right there. The previous sentence is a fact providing the ground for the prediction-- that it has a "tightly packed geometry".
E. an experimental result on which a subsequent statement about postperovskite is intended to cast doubt
Firstly, this sentence is not an experimental result. It says the higher pressures 'were not expected,' indicating that this is a prediction, rather than a result or observed effect. Additionally, the subsequent statement about the heavy elements is intended to provide an explanation for the higher density given what the scientist's expected, so this statement is certainly not intended to cast doubt.
Q2:
Best way to answer this question is to word match for 'Earth's inner core,' which shows up in the third paragraph.
A. contains a recently discovered crystalline mineral denser than magnesium silicate perovskite
From the previous paragraph, we know that the higher density is found in the mantle, not the core. While there is a recently discovered crystalline mineral denser than m.s.p (postperovskite), there's no indication that its found in Earth's inner core.
B. first produced a magnetic field around the Earth about one billion years ago
From the third paragraph, we know that the 'inner core cooled enough to solidify only about one billion years ago' and the 'solid inner core strengthens Earth's magnetic field'. But the fact that the solid inner core strengthens Earth's magnetic field doesn't mean that it first produced a magnetic field around one billion years ago. This choice distorts what's in the passage.
C. after its solidification contributed to an increase in the incidence of genetic mutations
The passage says the inner core cooled enough to solidify one billion years ago, and it being solid strengthens Earth's magnetic field. It shields radiation from space, which can cause genetic mutations. So, if anything, the solidification would reduce the incidence of genetic mutations.
D. influences the amount of radiation reaching Earth's surface from space
Correct. As we've established: solid core -> strengthens magnetic field -> shields radiation from space. So the inner core absolutely does influence the amount of radiation reaching Earth's surface.
E. was formerly believed to contain a greater abundance of heavy elements than the mantle contains
This choice confuses the preceding paragraph's discussion about the contents of the mantle. There is no discussion about the comparison between the abundance of heavy metals within the core versus the mantle.
Q3:
A. state the main conclusion of the passage and explain the methodology by which that conclusion was inferred
The second sentence briefly touches on the methodology 'inferred ints structure by measuring how seismic waves from earthquakes are distorted as they traverse it,' but there is no conclusion in the first paragraph, so this is out.
B. describe the main experimental evidence supporting a conclusion stated in the second paragraph
Firstly, the experimental evidence introduced in the first paragraph is used to introduce the information in the second paragraph. There's not really a conclusion in the second paragraph. All evidence necessary for the assumptions discussed in the second paragraph is present in the second paragraph itself. Out.
C. provide background information to help readers understand the discussion in the second and third paragraphs
Correct. This paragraph is providing background info abut the earth's mantle and its structure, and the second and third pargraphs elaborate on its structure and a hypothesis for what these findings may mean.
D. discuss a puzzling scientific observation for which the third paragraph provides a possible explanation
This pargraph never mentions a puzzling scientific observation. The second pargraph does that.
E. introduce the main topic of the passage and summarize the major findings discussed in the second and third paragraphs
While this paragraph does introduce, it doesn't summarize the major findings discussed in the second and third paragraphs. The second paragraph discusses explanations for a surprising observation about the lower mantle's bottommost layer and the third paragraph makes a hypothesis based on some of these findings. None of this information can be found in the first paragraph though.
Q4:
A. research into mineral formation in Earth's lower mantle, and interpretations of that research
Correct. This is exactly what the passage does. The first paragraph introduces research into the mantle and its structure, the second paragraph details mineral formation in the lower mantle, and the second and third paragraphs discuss interpretations of results from the research.
B. the concentric layers of minerals that form Earth's core, mantle, and crust
While it does discuss the layers of minerals that form Earth's core and mantle, it never discusses the minerals in the crust. Out.
C. competing hypotheses regarding the effects of postperovskite in Earth's mantle
This is discussed in the second paragraph, but it's not the focus of the passage.
D. the geometry and composition of two crystalline forms of magnesium silicate comprising distinct layers of Earth's lower mantle
While the geometry and composition of m.s.p are discussed in the second paragraph, there's no mention of the geomtry and composition of postperovskite in the third paragraph. Additionally, the third paragraph veers off into hypotheses about this unexpected new structure. This choice doesn't accurately reflect what's discussed in the passage. Out.
E. a possible explanation of the observed effects Earth's core and mantle have on Earth's magnetic field, and of the consequences of those effects
While Earth's core and mantle are discussed, but there's no link between the mantle and Earth's magnetic field, only the core. The passage discusses how 'the field shields surface radiation from space,' which could be a consequence, but this is really set up to present a hypothesis. So not only is this inaccurate, but it distorts the role of parts of the passage and it only occurs in the third paragraph-- which isn't representative of the passage as a whole.