Bishal123456789 wrote:
AjiteshArun VeritasPrepErika Among option A, B, and C, what is wrong with A and B and what does "do" refer to in C?
Alright, this is kind of a weird one that 1) is easiest to solve if you know the basics of how nuclear reactors work and 2) gets into the weeds of some comparison grammar rules.
The sentence is trying to convey, in essence, that nuclear fusion
merges atomic nuclei, whereas nuclear reactors use a process that
splits atomic nuclei.
(A) Nuclear fusion is the force that powers the Sun, the stars, and hydrogen bombs, merging the nuclei of atoms and not splitting them apart, as in nuclear reactors.In this answer choice, "and not" doesn't do a very good job creating the contrast we want to see — we're trying to contrast merging vs. splitting atomic nuclei, but all this sentence says is that nuclear fusion both 1) merges the nuclei and 2) doesn't split them. So this doesn't capture the intended meaning of the sentence.
A lot of folks in here are eliminating this one because "as" most commonly compares two verbs, and "in nuclear reactors" isn't a verb. HOWEVER, "as" can also be used to compare adverbs/adverbial phrases. "In nuclear reactors" is an adverbial phrase, so this is good to go. That said, there is no other adverbial phrase for "in nuclear reactors" to be parallel to, which ideally there would be.
(B) Nuclear fusion is the force that powers the Sun, the stars, and hydrogen bombs, merging the nuclei of atoms instead of splitting them apart, like nuclear reactors.This answer choice nicely uses "instead of" to contrast "merging" and "splitting". This is fine.
Here we use "like", which is used to compare two nouns. "Nuclear reactors" is a noun, but what noun are we comparing it to? Are "nuclear reactors" like "nuclear fusion"? Are they like "the Sun, the stars, and hydrogen bombs"? No! In fact, they're very different from them, as they're doing basically the opposite process (splitting instead of merging). There's no noun to logically compare "nuclear reactors" to and keep the meaning of the sentence intact.
(C) Nuclear fusion is the force that powers the Sun, the stars, and hydrogen bombs, merging the nuclei of atoms rather than splitting them apart, as nuclear reactors do.Similar to answer choice B, this answer choice uses "rather than" to contrast "merging" and "splitting". This is also fine.
Here we use "as" to compare two verbs: "splitting" and "do". "Do" implies the verb "split", so the comparison really conveys "... splitting them apart, as nuclear reactors do [split them apart]".
In most cases, the implied verb after helper verbs like "to be" (is, are, was, were, will be, have been, etc.) and "to do" (does, do, did, will do, have done, etc.) should be in a form that already exists in the sentence (e.g. "... splits atomic nuclei, as nuclear reactors do [split]" or "... splitting atomic nuclei, as nuclear reactors are [splitting]"). But it isn't strictly necessary. So this is fine, even if it isn't the absolute clearest and most parallel way to get the point across. If we had an answer where the implied verb mirrored an existing verb, it would be a better choice, provided all of the other meaning and grammar issues were correctly resolved.
Overall, this question is really rough, and I frankly wouldn't agonize over it. In most problems, you should be able to suss out intended meaning even if you don't remember much from high school physics/haven't recently watched Chernobyl. Similarly, comparisons will usually be more exactly parallel in correct answers.
Let me know if you want me to break down answer choices D and E as well.
Hey Erika. What is wrong with E apart from the fact that powering and merging are separate actions that do not result from each other? (also, how would anyone not from this background know this?)
I am unable to eliminate E even after going through many explanations.