Last visit was: 14 Dec 2024, 14:06 It is currently 14 Dec 2024, 14:06
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
User avatar
carcass
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Last visit: 14 Dec 2024
Posts: 4,606
Own Kudos:
34,764
 []
Given Kudos: 4,678
Posts: 4,606
Kudos: 34,764
 []
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
PoojanB
Joined: 09 May 2017
Last visit: 08 Dec 2020
Posts: 82
Own Kudos:
90
 []
Given Kudos: 69
Location: India
GMAT 1: 610 Q42 V33
GMAT 2: 620 Q45 V31
GPA: 4
WE:Engineering (Energy)
GMAT 2: 620 Q45 V31
Posts: 82
Kudos: 90
 []
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
carouselambra
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 14 Mar 2018
Last visit: 28 Apr 2023
Posts: 314
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 43
Posts: 314
Kudos: 442
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
bM22
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 May 2016
Last visit: 08 May 2024
Posts: 752
Own Kudos:
725
 []
Given Kudos: 1,316
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 752
Kudos: 725
 []
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shivangishar
SajjadAhmad,

For Q5 :
5. The author implies that making a sharp division between subject and object in physics is

(A) possible in a measurement of an object's length and position,but not in a measurement of its energy
(B) still theoretically possible in the small-scale world of atoms and electrons
(C) possible in the case of observations involving the passage of a complete quantum
(D) no longer an entirely accurate way to describe the observation of the universe
(E) a goal at which scientists still aim
It used to be supposed that, in the observation of nature, the universe could be divided into two distinct parts, a perceiving subject and a perceived object. In physics, subject and object were supposed to be entirely distinct, so that a description of any part of the universe would be independent of the observer.
D is the right answer but please consider the line from passage -
"We can no longer make a sharp division between the two in an effort to observe nature objectively."

Are we assuming, nature= universe? I don't think it's a fair assumption. If yes, can we assume stuff like this during exam as well?


Hi shivangishar,
In addition to the lines you have mentioned above, consider the next lines also: "We can no longer make a sharp division between the two in an effort to observe nature objectively. Such an attempt at objectivity would distort the crucial interrelationship of observer and observed as parts of a single whole."
Option D is a direct paraphrase of the above lines.

Now coming to you question: Are we assuming, nature= universe?. We are not assuming anything that is not mentioned in the passage or that cannot be inferred from the passage. We need to consider these lines: "It used to be supposed that, in the observation of nature, the universe could be divided into two distinct parts, a perceiving subject and a perceived object. In physics, subject and object were supposed to be entirely distinct, so that a description of any part of the universe would be independent of the observer. ", for better understanding of context.
The above mentioned lines clearly imply that for the observation of nature, some theories divide universe into 2 parts: subject and object, thus the co-relation of the same is present in the Option D.

For the next part of the your question: we should never make any assumptions or connection which are not mentioned in the passage. If you have read the passage carefully and still not able to find any connections between two things, never assume it explicitly.


Hope it helps.
Thanks.
User avatar
RakshithTN
Joined: 14 May 2020
Last visit: 17 Jun 2022
Posts: 57
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 264
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q48 V35 (Online)
GPA: 4
GMAT 1: 680 Q48 V35 (Online)
Posts: 57
Kudos: 90
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
6. The author's use of the phrase "in a sense" implies which of the following?

(A) Quanta of extremely long wavelength are essentially graduated in inches.
(B) Quanta of one-inch wavelength are not precisely analogous to yardsticks graduated in inches.
(C) Quanta of extremely long wavelength, in at least one respect, resemble quanta of shorter wavelength.
(0) Quanta of one-inch wavelength and quanta of extremely long wavelength do not differ only in their wavelengths.
(E) Quanta of one-inch wavelength must be measured by different standards than quanta of extremely long wavelengths.

carcass
Can you share the OE for this question?
User avatar
mSKR
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,317
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,317
Kudos: 883
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi AndrewN sir

Please check my explanation for Q-6 and Q1:


Quote:
6. The author's use of the phrase "in a sense" implies which of the following?

(A) Quanta of extremely long wavelength are essentially graduated in inches.
(B) Quanta of one-inch wavelength are not precisely analogous to yardsticks graduated in inches.
(C) Quanta of extremely long wavelength, in at least one respect, resemble quanta of shorter wavelength.
(0) Quanta of one-inch wavelength and quanta of extremely long wavelength do not differ only in their wavelengths.
(E) Quanta of one-inch wavelength must be measured by different standards than quanta of extremely long wavelengths.

Quote:
To measure a length accurately to within a millionth of an inch, we must have a measure graduate in millionths of an inch; a yardstick graduated in inches is useless. Quanta with a wavelength of one inch would be, in a sense, measures that are graduated in inches. Quanta of extremely long wavelength are useless in measuring anything except extremely large dimensions.

Quanta with a wavelength of 1 inch is measured in inches. But it will not be accurate as mentioned in first line that we can get readings only to one decimal place but not upto millionths of an inch. The same idea is mentioned in 3rd statement that these inches will also be useless if the wavelength is of large dimension.

E is wrong because our question is to identify the meaning of phrase " in a sense".
B fits in because our readings are not precise to measure wavelength of an inch to precise readings to more decimal places.


Q=1:
Quote:
1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) discuss a problem that hinders precise perception of the world
(B) point out the inadequacies of accepted units of measurement
(C) criticize attempts to distinguish between perceiving subjects and perceived objects
(D) compare and contrast rival scientific hypotheses about how the world should be measured and observed
(E) suggest the limited function of sensory observation

B: Wrong: a small topic in end of 2nd para: not a primary purpose
D: Wrong: only talked a little in 3rd passage; not a primary purpose.
E: Wrong: details have not been mentioned about functionalities

i was lost in A and C.
I chose C because in 3rd para: it is highlighted about subject and object and their relationships.
I rejected A because precise purpose was not talked in details but only in para 2, limitations have been talked about.
How shall i choose A AndrewN GMATNinja
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 13 Dec 2024
Posts: 3,503
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 500
Expert reply
Posts: 3,503
Kudos: 7,091
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
imSKR
Hi AndrewN sir

Please check my explanation for Q-6 and Q1:


Quote:
6. The author's use of the phrase "in a sense" implies which of the following?

(A) Quanta of extremely long wavelength are essentially graduated in inches.
(B) Quanta of one-inch wavelength are not precisely analogous to yardsticks graduated in inches.
(C) Quanta of extremely long wavelength, in at least one respect, resemble quanta of shorter wavelength.
(0) Quanta of one-inch wavelength and quanta of extremely long wavelength do not differ only in their wavelengths.
(E) Quanta of one-inch wavelength must be measured by different standards than quanta of extremely long wavelengths.

Quote:
To measure a length accurately to within a millionth of an inch, we must have a measure graduate in millionths of an inch; a yardstick graduated in inches is useless. Quanta with a wavelength of one inch would be, in a sense, measures that are graduated in inches. Quanta of extremely long wavelength are useless in measuring anything except extremely large dimensions.

Quanta with a wavelength of 1 inch is measured in inches. But it will not be accurate as mentioned in first line that we can get readings only to one decimal place but not upto millionths of an inch. The same idea is mentioned in 3rd statement that these inches will also be useless if the wavelength is of large dimension.

E is wrong because our question is to identify the meaning of phrase " in a sense".
B fits in because our readings are not precise to measure wavelength of an inch to precise readings to more decimal places.


Q=1:
Quote:
1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) discuss a problem that hinders precise perception of the world
(B) point out the inadequacies of accepted units of measurement
(C) criticize attempts to distinguish between perceiving subjects and perceived objects
(D) compare and contrast rival scientific hypotheses about how the world should be measured and observed
(E) suggest the limited function of sensory observation

B: Wrong: a small topic in end of 2nd para: not a primary purpose
D: Wrong: only talked a little in 3rd passage; not a primary purpose.
E: Wrong: details have not been mentioned about functionalities

i was lost in A and C.
I chose C because in 3rd para: it is highlighted about subject and object and their relationships.
I rejected A because precise purpose was not talked in details but only in para 2, limitations have been talked about.
How shall i choose A AndrewN GMATNinja
Hello, imSKR. My apology for getting to this so late, but two things happened to hinder an earlier response: 1) I lost power at my home for more than a day; and 2) by chance, I got a bunch of requests and a few PMs from other GMAT Club members, and I like to answer messages in the order in which I receive them. To get to your questions, in 6, notice that the line in which in a sense appears is discussing quanta with a wavelength of one inch, and that the previous line also discusses such quanta. These types of questions often draw from the line prior to the one in question. Here, we see that a larger tool, a yardstick, that uses as its units a measurement, inches, that would encompass an entire set of smaller sub-lengths or units, would prove useless for making finer measurements. All that in a sense conveys in the next line is that, despite the quanta being described as those with a wavelength of one inch, they are only being compared to the yardsticks mentioned earlier—their similar description does not make them the same. Choice (E) can be enticing for those looking ahead in the passage, but by that time, the comparison has already been made. Choice (B) is harder to argue against.

In question 1, choice (C) is easy to eliminate by the first word: criticize. The author uses no strong language in the passage to describe the views or actions of others. The passage is more neutral in tone, and discuss in (A) is much more fitting to that end. Neither can I find any issues with the rest of (A). The problem is the limitation (first line, paragraph two) of our visual perception (opening line), and all three paragraphs revolve around this central idea.

I hope that helps. You seem to be developing a keener eye for detail, per your analyses. Keep up the fine work.

- Andrew
avatar
himani007
Joined: 17 Jan 2022
Last visit: 08 Aug 2023
Posts: 3
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
2. According to the passage, quanta with an extremely long wavelength cannot be used to give complete information about the physical world because they

(A) exist independently of sense-data
(B) are graduated only in inches
(C) have an insignificant amount of energy
(D) cannot, with present-day instruments, be isolated from quanta of shorter wavelength
(E) provide an insufficiently precise means of measuring length and position
Given in para 2-but a completely accurate perception of the world will depend also on the exact measurement of the lengths and positions of what we wish to perceive. For this, quanta of extremely long wavelengths are useless.
E is the answer.



I don't quite understand why the answer to the second question is E and not B. When the passage clearly states that quanta with extremely long wavelengths are measured in one millionth i.e equivalent to inches.
avatar
himani007
Joined: 17 Jan 2022
Last visit: 08 Aug 2023
Posts: 3
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I dont understand how the second question's answer is not chouce B but E.
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 13 Dec 2024
Posts: 3,503
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 500
Expert reply
Posts: 3,503
Kudos: 7,091
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
himani007
Quote:
2. According to the passage, quanta with an extremely long wavelength cannot be used to give complete information about the physical world because they

(A) exist independently of sense-data
(B) are graduated only in inches
(C) have an insignificant amount of energy
(D) cannot, with present-day instruments, be isolated from quanta of shorter wavelength
(E) provide an insufficiently precise means of measuring length and position
Given in para 2-but a completely accurate perception of the world will depend also on the exact measurement of the lengths and positions of what we wish to perceive. For this, quanta of extremely long wavelengths are useless.
E is the answer.

I don't quite understand why the answer to the second question is E and not B. When the passage clearly states that quanta with extremely long wavelengths are measured in one millionth i.e equivalent to inches.
himani007
I dont understand how the second question's answer is not chouce B but E.
Hello, himani007. You have the right excerpt from the passage, but you did not stick closely enough to the question stem. Sentences two and three from the second paragraph map well onto the question stem and answer choice (E):

Quote:
And these quanta [with extremely long wavelengths] would be useful, as long as we only wanted to measure energy, but a completely accurate perception of the world will depend also on the exact measurement of the lengths and positions of what we wish to perceive. For this, quanta of extremely long wavelengths are useless.
So, why can these quanta not give complete information about the physical world? Because a completely accurate perception of the world will depend also on the exact measurement of the lengths and positions of what we wish to perceive. This is exactly what (E) says.

Answer choice (B) is inaccurate because it takes a comparison as a literal truth. The passage, again from paragraph two:

Quote:
Quanta with a wavelength of one inch would be, in a sense, measures that are graduated in inches. Quanta of extremely long wavelength are useless in measuring anything except extremely large dimensions.
Note that the verb would be indicates a hypothetical condition, and in a sense reinforces the sort of nature of the information. Answer choice (B) is saying that quanta with an extremely long wavelength are graduated only in inches, and the comparison made above has been lost in the process.

Perhaps the question makes more sense now. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7163 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
14163 posts