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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by identifying precursory phenomena (those that occur a few days before large quakes but not otherwise) turned their attention to changes (5) in seismic waves that had been detected prior to earthquakes. An explanation for such changes was offered by “dilatancy theory,” based on a well-known phenomenon observed in rocks in the laboratory: as stress builds, microfractures in rock close, (10) decreasing the rock’s volume. But as stress continues to increase, the rock begins to crack and expand in volume, allowing groundwater to seep in, weakening the rock. According to this theory, such effects could lead to several precursory phenomena in (15) the field, including a change in the velocity of seismic waves, and an increase in small, nearby tremors. Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening. Seismic waves (20) with unusual velocities were recorded before some earthquakes, but while the historical record confirms that most large earthquakes are preceded by minor tremors, these foreshocks indicate nothing about the magnitude of an impending quake and are (25) indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes. In the 1980s, some researchers turned their efforts from short-term to long-term prediction. Noting that earthquakes tend to occur repeatedly in (30) certain regions, Lindh and Baker attempted to identify patterns of recurrence, or earthquake cycles, on which to base predictions. In a study of earthquake-prone sites along the San Andreas Fault, they determined that quakes occurred at intervals of approximately 22 (35) years near one site and concluded that there was a 95 percent probability of an earthquake in that area by 1992. The earthquake did not occur within the time frame predicted, however. Evidence against the kind of regular (40) earthquake cycles that Lindh and Baker tried to establish has come from a relatively new field, paleoseismology. Paleoseismologists have unearthed and dated geological features such as fault scarps that were caused by (45) earthquakes thousands of years ago. They have determined that the average interval between ten earthquakes that took place at one site along the San Andreas Fault in the past two millennia was 132 years, but individual intervals ranged greatly, (50) from 44 to 332 years.
The author implies which of the following about the ability of the researchers mentioned in line 18 to predict earthquakes? (A)They can identify when an earthquake is likely to occur but not how large it will be. (B). They can identify the regions where earthquakes are likely to occur but not when they will occur. (C) They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur. (D) They are likely to be more accurate at short-term earthquake prediction than at long-term earthquake prediction. (E) They can determine the regions where earthquakes have occurred in the past but not the regions where they are likely to occur in the future.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
I think C is the best answer. The whole passage seems to talk about how we(scientists) don’t know anything significant about earthquakes to be able to predict earthquakes
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.