Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
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- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
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.
14 Sep 2022, 22:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
Pathshala
Between (B) and (E), the real difference lies in "describe the steps" and "explain a method".
Describe the steps would be "first, tie the object to a spring... then swing it really fast ..." etc. That is not what the passage does.
It tells you the method used to measure the masses. It explains you the concept and then how it is applicable to a star system. Hence (E) is better than (B).
17 Sep 2022, 15:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
Notice the colored parts of B:
"Measurements" are taken directly. Inferring or calculating a quantity from other figures is NOT "measuring" it.
Each paragraph focuses on a procedure that can be used to infer a particular mass from other measurements using principles of physical science.
These procedures take certain measurements as inputs, but are not measurements themselves.
Note further that the only "measurement" that IS, in fact, discussed in the second paragraph—"measuring the distance between stars"—is not explained in specific terms at all. Again contradicting B, there are no "steps" described for this measurement (about which I'm wondering myself! How do you 'measure' a distance between two things that are light-years away?)
E. explain a method by which scientists determine an unknown quantity[/quote]
This is the right answer. It's true that two separate procedures are described (one per paragraph), each of which determines a different sort of unknown quantity—but, as confirmed near the beginning of the second paragraph, the point of the first procedure (first paragraph) is just to serve as the basis of an analogy by which the second procedure (the main focus) might be better understood.
GMAC's short two-paragraph passages are often—but not always!—structured this way, with the first paragraph serving mainly to set up the second in some way and therefore not figuring into a compact statement of 'main idea' or 'primary purpose'.
Pathshala
"Measurements" are taken directly. Inferring or calculating a quantity from other figures is NOT "measuring" it.
Each paragraph focuses on a procedure that can be used to infer a particular mass from other measurements using principles of physical science.
These procedures take certain measurements as inputs, but are not measurements themselves.
Note further that the only "measurement" that IS, in fact, discussed in the second paragraph—"measuring the distance between stars"—is not explained in specific terms at all. Again contradicting B, there are no "steps" described for this measurement (about which I'm wondering myself! How do you 'measure' a distance between two things that are light-years away?)
E. explain a method by which scientists determine an unknown quantity[/quote]
This is the right answer. It's true that two separate procedures are described (one per paragraph), each of which determines a different sort of unknown quantity—but, as confirmed near the beginning of the second paragraph, the point of the first procedure (first paragraph) is just to serve as the basis of an analogy by which the second procedure (the main focus) might be better understood.
GMAC's short two-paragraph passages are often—but not always!—structured this way, with the first paragraph serving mainly to set up the second in some way and therefore not figuring into a compact statement of 'main idea' or 'primary purpose'.
17 Sep 2022, 15:40
Kudos
Bookmarks
abhishektyga
In a rigorously formal sense, anything that is not explicitly stated by an author, but can be deduced from statements that ARE made by the author, is "implied" or "suggested". Or, equivalently, you (the reader) can "infer" such a statement.
In this problem, we have separate statements in separate paragraphs that Procedure X can be used to calculate a certain mass, and that Procedure Y can be used to calculate a different type of mass.
The author does not explicitly make a statement connecting these two observations—i.e., there's nothing IN THE PASSAGE that SAYS "...the same type of goal as the other procedure"—so that's still technically an inference.
I agree with your implied (!!) point that the logical leap involved in this particular inference is extremely small. In other words, there's very little conceptual distance between "This thing is true for X and this thing is also true for Y" and "X and Y have this thing in common".
But, still... this is something the author didn't actually write in the text, so it's an inference. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
