Last visit was: 28 Apr 2026, 11:55 It is currently 28 Apr 2026, 11:55
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
Sub 505 (Easy)|   Science|   Short Passage|                              
User avatar
saby1410
Joined: 06 Feb 2017
Last visit: 10 Jun 2025
Posts: 167
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 93
Location: India
Posts: 167
Kudos: 23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 16,447
Own Kudos:
79,437
 [2]
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,447
Kudos: 79,437
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
homersimpsons
Joined: 26 Aug 2020
Last visit: 08 Aug 2022
Posts: 273
Own Kudos:
486
 [2]
Given Kudos: 114
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.15
WE:Accounting (Finance: Investment Banking)
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
woohoo921
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Last visit: 17 Mar 2023
Posts: 493
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 623
Posts: 493
Kudos: 150
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am so appreciative for the thorough discussion of this passage, but I still have a few lingering questions:
1. Is there a difference between "quantum tunneling" and "quantum theory" mentioned in the passage?
2. I do not understand this part of the passage: "If you throw a ball at a wall, you expect it to bounce back, not to pass straight through it. Yet subatomic particles perform the equivalent feat." What makes the feat "equivalent"? Subatomic particles are also not able to pass through it and bounce back? I am assuming that the author means subatomic particles can pass through the wall (based on "yet" and everything else mentioned in the passage).
3. For question 609 (which of the following statements about the earliest scientific....), I am caught up in Choice D. I chose D because of the first sentence in the passage "most attempts"--> this seems to simply that most physicists were unsuccessful. This question was very confusing to me because what does GMAC mean by "earliest"? There are the scientists that noted this as early as 1932.... then there are scientists in 1955 (Wigner and Eisenbud), and then later scientists (Raymond Chiao). Early relative to Wigner and Eisenbud or early relative to Chiao? Please note that I realize GMATNinja discussed why D is incorrect, but I am still lost based on my reasoning above.

Thank you for all of your time and help!
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2,133
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,826
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
woohoo921
I am so appreciative for the thorough discussion of this passage, but I still have a few lingering questions:
1. Is there a difference between "quantum tunneling" and "quantum theory" mentioned in the passage?
2. I do not understand this part of the passage: "If you throw a ball at a wall, you expect it to bounce back, not to pass straight through it. Yet subatomic particles perform the equivalent feat." What makes the feat "equivalent"? Subatomic particles are also not able to pass through it and bounce back? I am assuming that the author means subatomic particles can pass through the wall (based on "yet" and everything else mentioned in the passage).
3. For question 609 (which of the following statements about the earliest scientific....), I am caught up in Choice D. I chose D because of the first sentence in the passage "most attempts"--> this seems to simply that most physicists were unsuccessful. This question was very confusing to me because what does GMAC mean by "earliest"? There are the scientists that noted this as early as 1932.... then there are scientists in 1955 (Wigner and Eisenbud), and then later scientists (Raymond Chiao). Early relative to Wigner and Eisenbud or early relative to Chiao? Please note that I realize GMATNinja discussed why D is incorrect, but I am still lost based on my reasoning above.

Thank you for all of your time and help!
1. The passage defines quantum tunneling as "a remarkable phenomenon[...] in which particles travel through solid barriers that appear to be impenetrable." Quantum theory, on the other hand, seems to be the name for a broader framework that explains the probability of quantum tunneling.

The passage is primarily concerned with aspects of quantum tunneling, and doesn't really give us much separate info about quantum theory. When you're reading a passage, keep in mind the bigger picture of why the author is including the details -- if he/she is just mentioning quantum theory to better explain quantum tunneling, then you can focus on quantum tunneling as the more important element of the passage.

2. Yup, particles can tunnel through barriers. The author gives us the analogy of a ball bouncing off a wall to show how weird and surprising it is that particles can tunnel through something that seems impenetrable.

3. "Earliest" is different than "earlier" -- by saying "earliest," we know that question 3 is talking about the very first investigators of quantum tunneling. The earliest investigators mentioned in the passage are the ones working as early as 1932. So, we know without a doubt that the author is NOT talking about Wigner and Eisenbud, but about the scientists who came BEFORE Wigner and Eisenbud.

What do we know about these earliest investigators? That they noted the "extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling." If you note an aspect about a thing, then you must have observed that thing. So, we can't that these investigators didn't observe quantum tunneling -- the passage actually heavily implies that they DID observe quantum tunneling.

Nothing in the phrase "most attempts" implies that the attempts were unsuccessful -- I could say that "Most of my attempts to bake involve a lot of cursing." Does that mean I don't succeed in the end? Nope -- it could be that I DO successfully bake delicious goods. :-P

I hope that helps!
User avatar
Tanchat
Joined: 31 Jan 2020
Last visit: 20 Jun 2023
Posts: 215
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 139
Posts: 215
Kudos: 21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
kunal1608
Could experts please elaborate on the 3rd question explaining why exactly is option D incorrect .

The official explanation says "The passage indicates that by 1932, investigators had noted the rapidity of quantum tunneling; although this does not entail that they observed the phenomenon, it is consistent with their having been able to do so."
Quote:
Which of the following statements about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling can be inferred from the passage?
A) They found it difficult to increase barrier thickness continually.
B) They anticipated the later results of Chiao and his colleagues.
C) They did not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.
D) They were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling.
E) They made use of photons to study the phenomenon of tunneling.
Refer to the following lines:
Quote:
Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.
What do we know about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling? We know that they noted the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling. We also know that they did NOT hypothesize that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.

From that information, can we infer that "they were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling."? Not necessarily. Perhaps they observed instances of successful tunneling and perhaps they did not (as described in the OE, "although this does not entail that they observed the phenomenon, it is consistent with their having been able to do so"). Regardless, we certainly cannot infer that they were UNABLE to observe instances of successful tunneling.

In other words, we know that they might have observed instances of successful tunneling, but we cannot infer that they were unable to do so.

I hope that helps explain why (D) must be eliminated!


GMATNinja

From the starting [first sentence]

Most attempts by physicists to send particles faster than the speed of light involve a remarkable phenomenon called quantum tunneling, in which particles travel through solid barriers that appear to be impenetrable. Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932.


Why did they not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light?

1) send particles faster than the speed of light >> quantum tunneling
2) quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932
Then, the earliest investigator did suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.

Also, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud + Raymond Chiao and colleagues did prove and got the result supporting the hypothesis of Wignera and Eisenbud. I am not sure whether the earliest investigator were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling or not but we could imply there were no any results until 1955.

Could you help fix what and why I am wrong?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2,133
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,826
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 3


Tanchat

GMATNinja

From the starting [first sentence]

Most attempts by physicists to send particles faster than the speed of light involve a remarkable phenomenon called quantum tunneling, in which particles travel through solid barriers that appear to be impenetrable. Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932.


Why did they not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light?

1) send particles faster than the speed of light >> quantum tunneling
2) quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932
Then, the earliest investigator did suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.

Also, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud + Raymond Chiao and colleagues did prove and got the result supporting the hypothesis of Wignera and Eisenbud. I am not sure whether the earliest investigator were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling or not but we could imply there were no any results until 1955.

Could you help fix what and why I am wrong?
There are two distinct things happening here:

    1) Quantum tunneling: very fast movement through a barrier. The rapidity of quantum tunneling "was noted as early as 1932." So, we know that scientists observed quantum tunneling by 1932.

    2) Sending particles faster than the speed of light: this is achieved through quantum tunneling, but not every instance of quantum tunneling went faster than the speed of light. This wasn't even hypothesized until 1955.

So, although pre-1955 researchers observed quantum tunneling, they did not hypothesize that particles could go faster than the speed of light.

(D) is out, and (C) is the correct answer to question 3.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
waytowharton
Joined: 22 Apr 2021
Last visit: 16 Sep 2025
Posts: 127
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 409
Posts: 127
Kudos: 18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB GMATNinja

I have doubts in option E of question 2

Q542. RC00301-02. The passage implies that if tunneling time reached no maximum in increasing with barrier thickness, then

(E) Successful tunneling would occur even less frequently than it does

Doubt 1 - what does option E mean? My understanding is that option E means that successful tunneling would occur even less frequently if tunneling time reached no maximum than if tunneling time has reached maximum.

If my understanding is correct than I get that why option E is incorrect because probability to tunnel has no relation with tunneling time. If not, then please do explain.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 16,447
Own Kudos:
79,437
 [2]
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,447
Kudos: 79,437
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
waytowharton
KarishmaB GMATNinja

I have doubts in option E of question 2

Q542. RC00301-02. The passage implies that if tunneling time reached no maximum in increasing with barrier thickness, then

(E) Successful tunneling would occur even less frequently than it does

Doubt 1 - what does option E mean? My understanding is that option E means that successful tunneling would occur even less frequently if tunneling time reached no maximum than if tunneling time has reached maximum.

If my understanding is correct than I get that why option E is incorrect because probability to tunnel has no relation with tunneling time. If not, then please do explain.


Yes, the passage gives the relation between the 'time taken to tunnel' and 'speed of the particles'
If time taken to tunnel reaches a maximum after which it stays the same with thickness (more distance), it implies that the speed of the particle must be increasing. Then, if at any given thickness, time stays the same, that means that speed increases infinitely and has no upper limit. Then the speed can be more than speed of light.

There is no relation given between probability to tunnel (how often will the particle tunnel) and the time taken to tunnel (whether it reaches a max or not).
Hence option (E) is irrelevant.
User avatar
rickyric395
Joined: 07 Mar 2020
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 123
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 68
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Products:
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Posts: 123
Kudos: 110
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
kunal1608
Could experts please elaborate on the 3rd question explaining why exactly is option D incorrect .

The official explanation says "The passage indicates that by 1932, investigators had noted the rapidity of quantum tunneling; although this does not entail that they observed the phenomenon, it is consistent with their having been able to do so."
Quote:
Which of the following statements about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling can be inferred from the passage?
A) They found it difficult to increase barrier thickness continually.
B) They anticipated the later results of Chiao and his colleagues.
C) They did not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.
D) They were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling.
E) They made use of photons to study the phenomenon of tunneling.
Refer to the following lines:
Quote:
Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.
What do we know about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling? We know that they noted the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling. We also know that they did NOT hypothesize that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.

From that information, can we infer that "they were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling."? Not necessarily. Perhaps they observed instances of successful tunneling and perhaps they did not (as described in the OE, "although this does not entail that they observed the phenomenon, it is consistent with their having been able to do so"). Regardless, we certainly cannot infer that they were UNABLE to observe instances of successful tunneling.

In other words, we know that they might have observed instances of successful tunneling, but we cannot infer that they were unable to do so.

I hope that helps explain why (D) must be eliminated!
GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyTargetTestPrep
Quote:
Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.
It says that earliest investigators were aware of tunneling , but W&E hypothesized something. It can imply that maybe they anticipated certain behaviour such as the one in hypothesis, but were unable to postulate it maybe due to limitations wrt maths/physics understanding.
Eg- In earlier times, everyone was aware of gravity(not the term but the effects of it) but Newton was the one who hypothesized it.
So doesn't it imply that they might have anticipated something similar to what Chiao and his colleagues did but were unable to hypothesize due the limitations I pointed?
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 16,447
Own Kudos:
79,437
 [1]
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,447
Kudos: 79,437
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
rickyric395

GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyTargetTestPrep
Quote:
Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.
It says that earliest investigators were aware of tunneling , but W&E hypothesized something. It can imply that maybe they anticipated certain behaviour such as the one in hypothesis, but were unable to postulate it maybe due to limitations wrt maths/physics understanding.
Eg- In earlier times, everyone was aware of gravity(not the term but the effects of it) but Newton was the one who hypothesized it.
So doesn't it imply that they might have anticipated something similar to what Chiao and his colleagues did but were unable to hypothesize due the limitations I pointed?

Question 3:
Q543. RC00301-04. Which of the following statements about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling can be inferred from the passage?

(A) They found it difficult to increase barrier thickness continually.
(B) They anticipated the later results of Chiao and his colleagues.
(C) They did not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.
(D) They were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling.
(E) They made use of photons to study the phenomenon of tunneling.

First of all, we need to figure out who "the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling" were.
The earliest investigators mentioned are "Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, (these were the earliest investigators)... not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud (they came afterwards)—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.

So the passage says that the earliest investigators did note the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling but only much later was it hypothesised (theorised) that the particles could travel faster than light. That means that the earliest investigators did not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light. That thought occurred to other investigators later.
Hence (C) is correct.

No other option makes sense.

rickyric395 - There is no reason to believe that it did come to their mind but they did not say anything because of some limitations. They did not say any such thing is possible (even if they could not prove it, they just had to hypothesize) and that implies that they did not think that it was possible - whatever the limitations.
If anyone before Newton had pointed out that there is a certain force that Earth exerts on all things, then he/she would have hypothesized gravity first, not Newton. No one can be credited with a thought until and unless they speak out. It is as good as they never had that thought. We can infer that they did not think of it.
Also, is there any other option that comes even close?
User avatar
agrasan
Joined: 18 Jan 2024
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 678
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6,492
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 678
Kudos: 177
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi KarishmaB MartyMurray DmitryFarber

In question-3, to reject (D), can we say that there was still a probability (though small) as given in the paragraph "Quantum theory says that there is a distinct, albeit small, probability that such a particle will tunnel its way....." so it is bit of a stretch to conclude what option (D) says.
Am I correct in my elimination?

RaviChandra
Most attempts by physicists to send particles faster than the speed of light involve a remarkable phenomenon called quantum tunneling, in which particles travel through solid barriers that appear to be impenetrable. If you throw a ball at a wall, you expect it to bounce back, not to pass straight through it. Yet subatomic particles perform the equivalent feat. Quantum theory says that there is a distinct, albeit small, probability that such a particle will tunnel its way through a barrier; the probability declines exponentially as the thickness of the barrier increases. Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light. Their grounds were calculations that suggested that the time it takes a particle to tunnel through a barrier increases with the thickness of the barrier until tunneling time reaches a maximum; beyond that maximum, tunneling time stays the same regardless of barrier thickness. This would imply that once maximum tunneling time is reached, tunneling speed will increase without limit as barrier thickness increases. Several recent experiments have supported this hypothesis that tunneling particles sometimes reach superluminal speed. According to measurements performed by Raymond Chiao and colleagues, for example, photons can pass through an optical filter at 1.7 times the speed of light.

RC00301-03.
C00301-02.

Which of the following statements about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling can be inferred from the passage?

(A) They found it difficult to increase barrier thickness continually.
(B) They anticipated the later results of Chiao and his colleagues.
(C) They did not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.
(D) They were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling.
(E) They made use of photons to study the phenomenon of tunneling.

User avatar
Adit_
Joined: 04 Jun 2024
Last visit: 28 Apr 2026
Posts: 724
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 121
Products:
Posts: 724
Kudos: 236
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For question 2 the line that I think some people got confued with being the "probability decreases as thickness of barrier increases". This refers to the CHANCES that A particle can cross the barrier and does not talk of speed slowing down as the thickness of barrier increases.
RaviChandra
Most attempts by physicists to send particles faster than the speed of light involve a remarkable phenomenon called quantum tunneling, in which particles travel through solid barriers that appear to be impenetrable. If you throw a ball at a wall, you expect it to bounce back, not to pass straight through it. Yet subatomic particles perform the equivalent feat. Quantum theory says that there is a distinct, albeit small, probability that such a particle will tunnel its way through a barrier; the probability declines exponentially as the thickness of the barrier increases. Though the extreme rapidity of quantum tunneling was noted as early as 1932, not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light. Their grounds were calculations that suggested that the time it takes a particle to tunnel through a barrier increases with the thickness of the barrier until tunneling time reaches a maximum; beyond that maximum, tunneling time stays the same regardless of barrier thickness. This would imply that once maximum tunneling time is reached, tunneling speed will increase without limit as barrier thickness increases. Several recent experiments have supported this hypothesis that tunneling particles sometimes reach superluminal speed. According to measurements performed by Raymond Chiao and colleagues, for example, photons can pass through an optical filter at 1.7 times the speed of light.

RC00301-03.
The author of the passage mentions calculations about tunneling time and barrier thickness in order to

(A) suggest that tunneling time is unrelated to barrier thickness
(B) explain the evidence by which Winger and Eisenbud discovered the phenomenon of tunneling
(C) describe data recently challenged by Raymond Chiao and colleagues
(D) question why particles engaged in quantum tunneling rarely achieve extremely high speeds
(E) explain the basis for Winger and Eisenbud's hypothesis



RC00301-02.
The passage implies that if tunneling time reached no maximum in increasing with barrier thickness, then

(A) Tunneling speed would increase with barrier thickness
(B) Tunneling speed would decline with barrier thickness
(C) Tunneling speed would vary with barrer thickness
(D) Tunneling speed would not be expected to increase without limit
(E) Successful tunneling would occur even less frequently than it does



RC00301-04.
Which of the following statements about the earliest scientific investigators of quantum tunneling can be inferred from the passage?

(A) They found it difficult to increase barrier thickness continually.
(B) They anticipated the later results of Chiao and his colleagues.
(C) They did not suppose that tunneling particles could travel faster than light.
(D) They were unable to observe instances of successful tunneling.
(E) They made use of photons to study the phenomenon of tunneling.

   1   2 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
507 posts
363 posts