GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 24 Sep 2018, 18:50

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

Reading Comprehension

  post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 09 Jul 2018
Posts: 17
Reading Comprehension  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Aug 2018, 22:26
1
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.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2018
Posts: 4
Reading Comprehension  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Aug 2018, 22:30
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


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 09 Jul 2018
Posts: 17
Re: Reading Comprehension  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Aug 2018, 23:00
I am not able to understand how C is the answer and I have strong believe on A.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2018
Posts: 4
Re: Reading Comprehension  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Aug 2018, 23:03
ritu1009 wrote:
I am not able to understand how C is the answer and I have strong believe on A.


Where in the passage does it say that the scientists have been able to predict when earthquakes will occur?


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum
RC Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: Perfecting myself for GMAT
Joined: 22 May 2017
Posts: 642
Concentration: Nonprofit
Schools: Haas '21
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Reading Comprehension  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Aug 2018, 23:06
1
Discussed here https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-1971-rese ... 22825.html

Please search the forum before posting.
_________________

If you like my post press kudos +1

New - RC Butler - 2 RC's everyday

Tag me in RC questions if you need help. Please provide your analysis of the question in the post along with the tag.

GMAT Club Bot
Re: Reading Comprehension &nbs [#permalink] 30 Aug 2018, 23:06
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Reading Comprehension

  post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.