GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

It is currently 21 Feb 2020, 02:32

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

Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 02 May 2019
Posts: 53
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Oct 2019, 07:00
DiyaDutta wrote:
3. The "serious problem" referred to in line 17 could be solved if which of the following were true?

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
C. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more dense than it is currently estimated to be.
D. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more massive than it is currently estimated to be.
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.

Hi,
I am unable to understand why option A is correct and E is not.
"Although according to current theory this makes the mass at the center of the galaxy too dense to be anything but a blackhole, the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center presents a serious problem."
I don't understand how is A correct. If the amount of matter a black hole would engulf is proved to be several thousand times too high then wouldn't that mean that the black hole should radiate even more energy than it already does. This doesn't solve the serious problem which states that there is a lack of energy radiating from the center.
Whereas E states that far more energy is currently radiated so then the problem of lack of energy radiated from the center will be solved. So shouldn't this be the correct answer?

2. According to the passage, the dynamical evidence referred to in lines 9–10 supports which of the following?

A. Recent assumptions about the velocities of stars
B. Widely held predictions about the amount of matter a black hole will engulf
C. The existence of an extremely dense object at the center of the Milky Way
D. The contention that too much energy is coming from the mass at the Milky Way's galactic center for that mass to be a black hole
E. The conclusion that a compact object of two to three million times the mass of our Sun is too dense to be anything but a black hole

I understand why C is the correct answer. But the passage states that “This dynamical evidence, based on recently confirmed assumptions about the stars' velocities, argues for an extremely compact object with a mass two to three million times the mass of our Sun. Although according to current theory this makes the mass at the center of the galaxy too dense to be anything but a blackhole, the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center presents a serious problem”
So option E “The conclusion that a compact object of two to three million times the mass of our Sun is too dense to be anything but a black hole” Cant we say that although the lack of energy radiating from the center proves otherwise, the dynamical evidence supports the fact about compact object and hence the current theory that it cannot be anything but a black hole?


Had the exact same thought. If this evidence didn't support this conclusion, then it wouldn't be inconclusive. We could use the energy to conclusively say there is not a black hole at the center. The energy calls the conclusion into question, but the density or dynamic evidence is the only supporting evidence given that there is a black hole at the center.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutors
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 3162
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Nov 2019, 10:53
2

Question #3


DiyaDutta wrote:
3.
Hi,
I am unable to understand why option A is correct and E is not.
"Although according to current theory this makes the mass at the center of the galaxy too dense to be anything but a blackhole, the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center presents a serious problem."
I don't understand how is A correct. If the amount of matter a black hole would engulf is proved to be several thousand times too high then wouldn't that mean that the black hole should radiate even more energy than it already does. This doesn't solve the serious problem which states that there is a lack of energy radiating from the center.
Whereas E states that far more energy is currently radiated so then the problem of lack of energy radiated from the center will be solved. So shouldn't this be the correct answer?

StudiosTom wrote:
GMATNinja: For #3, we have problem with less energy radiating.Option E says mote energy is radiated. What is wrong with E.


NoMatterWhat wrote:
UPS67 wrote:
I have issue with the explanation of Question 3.

As you mentioned "However, if it were discovered that the matter engulfed were several thousand times less than previously estimated, the relatively low level of radiated energy observed would no longer seem at odds with the existence of the hypothesized black hole."

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.

So option A is opposite and option B fits in.
Hence, could you please check the option and correct me if my understanding is wrong.



I m with you, I checked on Option B too.....Please someone help us out


gmat1393 wrote:
Hi GMATNinja

Please help with Question 3.

Thanks

Lots of questions on #3! nick1816 and RK007 have it exactly right -- but I'll explain in a bit more depth in case that is helpful to anyone :)

First, let's look at the ASSUMPTION made by scientists: "Scientists believe that the amount of energy that escapes the black hole should be about 10 percent of the matter's rest energy."

Now let's look at the ACTUAL amount of energy escaping the black hole: "the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center presents a serious problem... compared to widely held predictions based on how much matter should be falling into a theoretical central black hole, there is a discrepancy by a factor of a few thousand."

So, the ACTUAL amount of energy escaping the black hole is significantly lower than the amount that scientists believe should be escaping based on their ASSUMPTION.

Stated another way, the amount of energy that scientists ASSUME should be escaping from the black hole is much higher than the ACTUAL amount of energy escaping the black hole.

Question #3 asks us to solve this problem.
Quote:
A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.

Okay, so according to (A) the scientists' current ASSUMPTION is way too high. What happens if we modify the current assumption to be thousands of times lower than it currently is, as suggested by (A)?

This totally fixes our problem -- the current assumption is much higher than the actual value. An assumption of a much lower amount of energy escaping the black hole would match the actual observation.

(A) is the correct answer.

Quote:
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.

If the current assumption is much too low, then we would need to modify it to be higher than it currently is.

But wait! The current assumption is already much higher than the actual amount of energy escaping the black hole. If we say that the current assumption needs to be higher than it already is, then the gap between the assumption and the actual value will increase -- which is not what we want.

(B) makes our "serious problem" even worse. Eliminate (B).

Quote:
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.

Again, we are talking about the ASSUMED amount of energy, which was already much higher than the ACTUAL amount of energy being emitted.

(E), if true, means that matter would radiate far more energy than is currently assumed -- in other words, the current assumption is too low.

Just like (B), (E) increases the gap between the too-high assumption and the actual value, which worsens our problem.

(E) is out, and (A) is the answer.

I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutors @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: all videos by topic

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 20 Oct 2018
Posts: 225
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
CAT Tests
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2019, 18:53
gmatt1476 wrote:
This passage is excerpted from material published
in 1997.

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀Is there a massive black hole at the center of our
⠀⠀⠀ galaxy, the Milky Way? The evidence is inconclusive.
(5)  Just as the Sun's mass can be determined, given
⠀⠀⠀ knowledge of other variables, by the velocity at
⠀⠀⠀ which its planets orbit, the mass at the center of the
⠀⠀⠀ Milky Way can be revealed by the velocities of stars
⠀⠀⠀ and gas orbiting the galactic center. This dynamical
(10)  evidence, based on recently confirmed assumptions
⠀⠀⠀ about the stars' velocities, argues for an extremely
⠀⠀⠀ compact object with a mass two to three million
⠀⠀⠀ times the mass of our Sun. Although according to
⠀⠀⠀ current theory this makes the mass at the center
(15)  of the galaxy too dense to be anything but a black
⠀⠀⠀ hole, the relative lack of energy radiating from the
⠀⠀⠀ galactic center presents a serious problem. A black
⠀⠀⠀ hole's gravity attracts surrounding matter, which
⠀⠀⠀ swirls around the black hole, emitting some energy
(20)  as it is engulfed. Scientists believe that the amount of
⠀⠀⠀ energy that escapes the black hole should be about
⠀⠀⠀ 10 percent of the matter's rest energy (the energy
⠀⠀⠀ equivalent of its mass according to the equation
⠀⠀⠀ E=mc^2). But when the energy coming from the
(25)  galactic center is compared to widely held predictions
⠀⠀⠀ based on how much matter should be falling into a
⠀⠀⠀ theoretical central black hole, there is a discrepancy
⠀⠀⠀ by a factor of a few thousand.



3. The “serious problem” referred to in line 17 could be solved if which of the following were true?

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
C. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more dense than it is currently estimated to be.
D. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more massive than it is currently estimated to be.
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.





Even though GMATNinja has explained the solution to Q3 quite clearly, I would like to post a little mathematical view to this question:

Let us consider the assumption side of the scientists:
Matter's rest energy = E = 1000
Scientists believe the energy radiated should be 10% of rest energy = 0.1 E = 100

Actual observations:
The observed energy radiated = Ea = 10

Given condition = Ea << 0.1 E ( 10 << 100)

The question is focusing on making changes in the "Assumption" side and not on the observed side. Hence, whatever alterations are to be made will be in E

Choice A: Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high
Means the scientists assumed that E was too high --> Thus in practical conditions E's value would decrease. Thus 0.1E's value can decrease from 100 to 10-15. Thus now Ea will be closer to 0.1E
- Correct

Choice B: Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
Means the scientists assumed that E was too low. Thus in actual conditions the value of E should be few thousand times --> E will increase from 1000 to 100,000 --> 0.1E --> 10,000 and Ea will remain 10. Thus we see that the difference has increased.
- Incorrect

Option E: Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed
I believe the trick here is to realize that the option is talking about "Assumption" side. Hence, the "Ea" should be kept unaffected and we need to focus only on "E" part.
The matter radiated far more energy --> Means instead of 10% the matters releases say 70% energy. Thus the inequality will transform into Ea << 0.7E --> Thus we see that the difference has increased.
- Incorrect
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 13 Oct 2019
Posts: 21
Location: India
GPA: 4
Premium Member
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Dec 2019, 03:01
shridhar786 wrote:
NoMatterWhat wrote:
UPS67 wrote:
I have issue with the explanation of Question 2.

As you mentioned "However, if it were discovered that the matter engulfed were several thousand times less than previously estimated, the relatively low level of radiated energy observed would no longer seem at odds with the existence of the hypothesized black hole."

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.

So option A is opposite and option B fits in.
Hence, could you please check the option and correct me if my understanding is wrong.



I m with you, I checked on Option B too.....Please someone help us out


I am with both of you
can anyone help us out with question number 3


Both options A & B talks about CURRENT Assumptions, i.e. Because the scientists assumed that the amount of matter engulfed by the black hole was too high, the amount of energy expected to be radiated must also be high. But as per the last line of the paragraph, 'But when the energy coming out of the galactic center is compared to the widely held predictions ..... there was a discrepancy of a factor of a few thousand' , so the actual amount of energy radiated is less.

The question asks you to show a way in which you can solve this problem OR to resolve the flaw. The flaw is that the current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be too high (it must be low, in order to solve the discrepancy).
So it must be A.

I believe option A is worded in a tricky manner but is the right answer.

Hope I helped.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Jan 2019
Posts: 106
Location: Canada
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.24
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jan 2020, 10:30
Let me try question 3 for you guys:

Basically the serious problem described in the passage is that the mass discovered is assumed to be a black hole, so the black hole needs to have two properties: it should be dense and it should be emitting certain energy. The passage has explicitly stated that the mass is dense but the theory clearly mentions the lack of energy is a serious problem.

Further, the passage goes on to proceed with the explanation of the ideal energy/energy parameters as per theory, but when the actual energy emitted is compared, the difference is by few thousands. (mentioned last line)

So how does one solve this problem of energy being less in the hole/mass discovered? It is by certain assumptions which say that the energy engulfing the mass is high.
Hence A.

Hope this helps
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 32
Location: India
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jan 2020, 19:05
Need help for Q3.

I think E should be the correct answer.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutors
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 3162
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jan 2020, 21:04
Harsh2111s wrote:
Need help for Q3.

I think E should be the correct answer.

Have you tried reviewing this post?
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutors @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: all videos by topic

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Status: Chartered Accountant
Joined: 17 Aug 2018
Posts: 61
Location: India
WE: Accounting (Consulting)
CAT Tests
Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jan 2020, 03:02
gmatt1476 wrote:
gmatt1476 wrote:
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀This passage is excerpted from material published
in 1997.

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀Is there a massive black hole at the center of our
⠀⠀⠀ galaxy, the Milky Way? The evidence is inconclusive.
(5)  Just as the Sun's mass can be determined, given
⠀⠀⠀ knowledge of other variables, by the velocity at
⠀⠀⠀ which its planets orbit, the mass at the center of the
⠀⠀⠀ Milky Way can be revealed by the velocities of stars
⠀⠀⠀ and gas orbiting the galactic center. This dynamical
(10)  evidence, based on recently confirmed assumptions
⠀⠀⠀ about the stars' velocities, argues for an extremely
⠀⠀⠀ compact object with a mass two to three million
⠀⠀⠀ times the mass of our Sun. Although according to
⠀⠀⠀ current theory this makes the mass at the center
(15)  of the galaxy too dense to be anything but a black
⠀⠀⠀ hole, the relative lack of energy radiating from the
⠀⠀⠀ galactic center presents a serious problem. A black
⠀⠀⠀ hole's gravity attracts surrounding matter, which
⠀⠀⠀ swirls around the black hole, emitting some energy
(20)  as it is engulfed. Scientists believe that the amount of
⠀⠀⠀ energy that escapes the black hole should be about
⠀⠀⠀ 10 percent of the matter's rest energy (the energy
⠀⠀⠀ equivalent of its mass according to the equation
⠀⠀⠀ E=mc^2). But when the energy coming from the
(25)  galactic center is compared to widely held predictions
⠀⠀⠀ based on how much matter should be falling into a
⠀⠀⠀ theoretical central black hole, there is a discrepancy
⠀⠀⠀ by a factor of a few thousand.


1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. present several theories that could account for a particular phenomenon
B. argue that a certain question needs to be reframed in light of new evidence
C. resolve an apparent inconsistency between two lines of evidence
D. explain why a certain issue remains unresolved
E. present evidence that calls into question certain assumptions of a current theory

RC60500.01-10



2. According to the passage, the dynamical evidence referred to in lines 9–10 supports which of the following?

A. Recent assumptions about the velocities of stars
B. Widely held predictions about the amount of matter a black hole will engulf
C. The existence of an extremely dense object at the center of the Milky Way
D. The contention that too much energy is coming from the mass at the Milky Way's galactic center for that mass to be a black hole
E. The conclusion that a compact object of two to three million times the mass of our Sun is too dense to be anything but a black hole

RC60500.01-20



3. The “serious problem” referred to in line 17 could be solved if which of the following were true?

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
C. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more dense than it is currently estimated to be.
D. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more massive than it is currently estimated to be.
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.

RC60500.01-30



4. The “widely held predictions” mentioned in line 25 are predictions about the

A. compactness of objects whose mass is millions of times the mass of our Sun
B. velocities of stars orbiting the galactic center
C. amount of matter swirling around the object at the center of the Milky Way
D. amount of matter falling into a theoretical central black hole
E. amount of energy that should be coming from a black hole at the center of the Milky Way

RC60500.01-40



Official Explanation

RC60500.01-30

3. The “serious problem” referred to in line 17 could be solved if which of the following were true?

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
C. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more dense than it is currently estimated to be.
D. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more massive than it is currently estimated to be.
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.

Application

Which one of the five options would, if true, indicate a possible solution to the serious problem referred to? The serious problem is said to arise from the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center compared with the expected value if a matter-engulfing black hole were truly at the center of the Milky Way.

According to the passage, the radiated energy turned out to be a few thousand times less than had been expected, on theoretical grounds, to radiate from mass engulfed by the hypothetical black hole. However, if it were discovered that the matter engulfed were several thousand times less than previously estimated, the relatively low level of radiated energy observed would no longer seem at odds with the existence of the hypothesized black hole.

A. Correct. Reviewing the assumptions underlying the widely held predictions could lead to revised predictions that harmonize with the observational evidence regarding radiated energy from the galaxy's center.

B. The passage states that the assumed quantity of engulfed matter already seems to be radiating too little; this answer choice would actually make the “serious problem” in the passage worse. That is, assuming that there is actually more engulfed matter with such a small amount of radiation would simply worsen the problem.

C. The passage does not specify what impact a greater-than-estimated density would have on the quantity of energy that is radiated. That is, even if greater mass would change predictions, greater density may not do so.

D. If the object were more massive, then presumably the matter engulfed by this hypothetical more massive black hole would radiate a quantity of energy even greater than the observed quantity. This again would simply make the “serious problem” worse.

E. Given that not enough radiated energy is currently being observed, finding that the matter being engulfed radiates even more energy than expected would make the “serious problem” significantly worse. That is, the relatively low quantity of radiated energy observed would fall even farther short of the quantity expected.

The correct answer is A.


HiGMATNinja, VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep

Statement from the passage:
But when the energy coming from the galactic center is compared to widely held predictions based on how much matter should be falling into a theoretical central black hole, there is a discrepancy by a factor of a few thousand

According to the passage, there is a discrepancy of a factor of few thousands in the light emitted by the center of the galaxy.

According to official explanation, the discrepancy has been interpreted as a shortage of energy.

Can't discrepancy refer to excess of energy too?

Thank you.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
V
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10112
Location: Pune, India
Re: Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jan 2020, 23:35
1
Balkrishna wrote:
gmatt1476 wrote:
gmatt1476 wrote:
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀This passage is excerpted from material published
in 1997.

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀Is there a massive black hole at the center of our
⠀⠀⠀ galaxy, the Milky Way? The evidence is inconclusive.
(5)  Just as the Sun's mass can be determined, given
⠀⠀⠀ knowledge of other variables, by the velocity at
⠀⠀⠀ which its planets orbit, the mass at the center of the
⠀⠀⠀ Milky Way can be revealed by the velocities of stars
⠀⠀⠀ and gas orbiting the galactic center. This dynamical
(10)  evidence, based on recently confirmed assumptions
⠀⠀⠀ about the stars' velocities, argues for an extremely
⠀⠀⠀ compact object with a mass two to three million
⠀⠀⠀ times the mass of our Sun. Although according to
⠀⠀⠀ current theory this makes the mass at the center
(15)  of the galaxy too dense to be anything but a black
⠀⠀⠀ hole, the relative lack of energy radiating from the
⠀⠀⠀ galactic center presents a serious problem. A black
⠀⠀⠀ hole's gravity attracts surrounding matter, which
⠀⠀⠀ swirls around the black hole, emitting some energy
(20)  as it is engulfed. Scientists believe that the amount of
⠀⠀⠀ energy that escapes the black hole should be about
⠀⠀⠀ 10 percent of the matter's rest energy (the energy
⠀⠀⠀ equivalent of its mass according to the equation
⠀⠀⠀ E=mc^2). But when the energy coming from the
(25)  galactic center is compared to widely held predictions
⠀⠀⠀ based on how much matter should be falling into a
⠀⠀⠀ theoretical central black hole, there is a discrepancy
⠀⠀⠀ by a factor of a few thousand.


1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. present several theories that could account for a particular phenomenon
B. argue that a certain question needs to be reframed in light of new evidence
C. resolve an apparent inconsistency between two lines of evidence
D. explain why a certain issue remains unresolved
E. present evidence that calls into question certain assumptions of a current theory

RC60500.01-10



2. According to the passage, the dynamical evidence referred to in lines 9–10 supports which of the following?

A. Recent assumptions about the velocities of stars
B. Widely held predictions about the amount of matter a black hole will engulf
C. The existence of an extremely dense object at the center of the Milky Way
D. The contention that too much energy is coming from the mass at the Milky Way's galactic center for that mass to be a black hole
E. The conclusion that a compact object of two to three million times the mass of our Sun is too dense to be anything but a black hole

RC60500.01-20



3. The “serious problem” referred to in line 17 could be solved if which of the following were true?

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
C. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more dense than it is currently estimated to be.
D. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more massive than it is currently estimated to be.
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.

RC60500.01-30



4. The “widely held predictions” mentioned in line 25 are predictions about the

A. compactness of objects whose mass is millions of times the mass of our Sun
B. velocities of stars orbiting the galactic center
C. amount of matter swirling around the object at the center of the Milky Way
D. amount of matter falling into a theoretical central black hole
E. amount of energy that should be coming from a black hole at the center of the Milky Way

RC60500.01-40



Official Explanation

RC60500.01-30

3. The “serious problem” referred to in line 17 could be solved if which of the following were true?

A. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be several thousand times too high.
B. Current assumptions about how much matter a black hole would engulf proved to be a few thousand times too low.
C. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more dense than it is currently estimated to be.
D. The object at the center of the Milky Way turned out to be far more massive than it is currently estimated to be.
E. Matter being engulfed by a black hole radiated far more energy than is currently assumed.

Application

Which one of the five options would, if true, indicate a possible solution to the serious problem referred to? The serious problem is said to arise from the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center compared with the expected value if a matter-engulfing black hole were truly at the center of the Milky Way.

According to the passage, the radiated energy turned out to be a few thousand times less than had been expected, on theoretical grounds, to radiate from mass engulfed by the hypothetical black hole. However, if it were discovered that the matter engulfed were several thousand times less than previously estimated, the relatively low level of radiated energy observed would no longer seem at odds with the existence of the hypothesized black hole.

A. Correct. Reviewing the assumptions underlying the widely held predictions could lead to revised predictions that harmonize with the observational evidence regarding radiated energy from the galaxy's center.

B. The passage states that the assumed quantity of engulfed matter already seems to be radiating too little; this answer choice would actually make the “serious problem” in the passage worse. That is, assuming that there is actually more engulfed matter with such a small amount of radiation would simply worsen the problem.

C. The passage does not specify what impact a greater-than-estimated density would have on the quantity of energy that is radiated. That is, even if greater mass would change predictions, greater density may not do so.

D. If the object were more massive, then presumably the matter engulfed by this hypothetical more massive black hole would radiate a quantity of energy even greater than the observed quantity. This again would simply make the “serious problem” worse.

E. Given that not enough radiated energy is currently being observed, finding that the matter being engulfed radiates even more energy than expected would make the “serious problem” significantly worse. That is, the relatively low quantity of radiated energy observed would fall even farther short of the quantity expected.

The correct answer is A.


HiGMATNinja, VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep

Statement from the passage:
But when the energy coming from the galactic center is compared to widely held predictions based on how much matter should be falling into a theoretical central black hole, there is a discrepancy by a factor of a few thousand

According to the passage, there is a discrepancy of a factor of few thousands in the light emitted by the center of the galaxy.

According to official explanation, the discrepancy has been interpreted as a shortage of energy.

Can't discrepancy refer to excess of energy too?

Thank you.


Yes, discrepancy can be either excess or shortage.

But, the passage clearly mentions on line 16:
... the relative lack of energy radiating from the galactic center presents a serious problem.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 18 Mar 2019
Posts: 21
Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jan 2020, 09:01
Ques 3

Scientists believe according to E=mc^2......... they say the energy is 10% of matter's energy
and the energy is less about 1000 times than the energy predicted, on the basis of how much those blackholes engulfed. As given, that low level of energy is a problem. How can we increase that energy to solve the problem?

'More the matter, more the energy' as the passage states.

Scientists believe that the amount of
⠀⠀⠀ energy that escapes the black hole should be about
⠀⠀⠀ 10 percent of the matter's rest energy (the energy
⠀⠀⠀ equivalent of its mass according to the equation
⠀⠀⠀ E=mc^2).





So, to increase the energy by 1000 times, we need to give it the matter 1000 times greater.
GMAT Club Bot
Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky   [#permalink] 28 Jan 2020, 09:01

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 30 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Is there a massive black hole at the center of our galaxy, the Milky

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





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