Suppose we were in a spaceship in free fall, where objects are weightl

Hello Experts,

Q3 :- Which of the following best describes the relationship between the first and the second paragraph of the passage?
A The first paragraph provides an illustration useful for understanding a procedure described in the second paragraph.
B The first paragraph describes a hypothetical situation whose plausibility is tested in the second paragraph.
C The first paragraph evaluates the usefulness of a procedure whose application is described further in the second paragraph.
D The second paragraph provides evidence to support a claim made in the first paragraph.
E The second paragraph analyzes the practical implications of a methodology proposed in the first paragraph.

I was torn between A and C. I eventually selected A because C says the the first para evaluates the usefulness of a procedure. The author doesn't do that Eg: - The author doesn't say the procedure is useful here but can't be used there. He/she just describes a procedure

Hence I eliminated C

I would like to hear your thoughts as to how you eliminated option C in this question. Thanks

Not an expert but would still like to share my thought process :

This is what option 'C' says:

The first paragraph evaluates the usefulness of a procedure whose application is described further in the second paragraph.

The first paragraph does actually evaluate the usefulness of a procedure, and that usefulness is measuring the mass of an object using the process described.
The first paragraph does not explicitly state that usefulness, but I guess that's implied.

What's incorrect in this option is this part 'whose application is described further in the second paragraph'
What is mentioned in the second paragraph is not an application of the procedure mentioned in the first paragraph (to measure the mass of unknown object).
Second paragraph just uses an analogy to measure the weight of the stars, but it is not an extension of what is stated in the 1st paragraph but rather an extension of the analogy that is stated in the 2nd paragraph.
Remember, the process stated in the 1st paragraph can not be used to measure the weight of stars. Hence, the application of what is stated in the 1st paragraph can not be used to measure the weight of the stars.
Weight of the stars can in fact be measured by an analogous procedure.

Took 6 mins.Got No.3 ques. incorrect. Dear GMATNinja GMATNinja2, Can you help here?

sadikabid27, can you let us know what you were thinking on #3? That will help us understand where you went wrong and put us in a better position to help.

Also, please use the request verbal experts' reply button to help ensure that your questions get noticed.

Thanks!

I have selected E . Please let me know why E is wrong here @GMATNinjaTwo

Why not B ? The paragraph talks about the hypothetical situation in the first paragraph. Could you explain where am I going wrong ?

We need to consider the entire statement being made in choice (B). You're right to point out that the first paragraph describes a hypothetical technique. That technique is the spring scale/small-solid-object method of measuring mass. However, does the second paragraph test the plausibility of this technique? Is that why the author is bringing up the measurement of attractive force between stars?

The answer is no. The author uses the second paragraph to present an analogous procedure. The point of the second paragraph is not to test whether we can measure mass by measuring the tension of a string between two objects. The point is to describe a different procedure for measuring the mass of stars, referencing the first paragraph as a comparable scenario.

I hope this clarifies why (A) remains the best choice!

Hello GMATNinja , I agree with your reasoning. However, I originally chose option D. It seemed to me more like an evidence proving what the author said is not baseless but have some grounds even though 2nd para doesn't 100% follow the same hypothesis.

For us to accept (D) as the best possible choice, we need to identify the claim made in P1. Then we need to identify how P2 provides evidence to support that claim.

P1 presents a hypothetical scenario, where we determine the mass of an object inside a spaceship that's in free fall. P1 makes the claim that in this scenario, we could attach a spring scale to the object using a string, then determine the weight of the mass of the object by measuring the tension in the string. But why is the author bringing this up? So far, it seems like the only purpose of this paragraph is to tell us about this specific method, and how it works in this specific scenario.

Can we say that P2 presents evidence to support the claim made in P1? Nope. Here's why:

• P2 doesn't give us any more information about the scale, the string, the physics of free fall, or the math that's being done to measure the mass of the object that is discussed in P1. If (D) were correct, we'd expect to see P2 show concrete proof, in order to further convince us that the procedure described in P1 works.
• Instead, P2 describes a completely different case, where we determine the masses of stars by measuring the time required for the stars to circle each other as well as the distance between them. Throughout P2, the author brings up analogous details in P1 in order to helps us understand this more cosmic, less tangible procedure.

Once we read the whole passage, we see that the purpose of P1 was to make it easier for us to understand P2. This is not the same as using P2 to strengthen a claim made in P1, so we eliminate (D).

I hope this helps!

Q1 :- It can be inferred from the passage that the two procedures described in the passage have which of the following in common?
The first paragraph certainly defines a hypothetical methodology of measuring mass of unknown, and no where in the paragraph it says that the methodology has been brought in practice. The paragraph starts with "Suppose we..." and ends with "...From the measured tension and speed of whirling, we could determine the object’s mass". It definitely describes a method of measuring weight, but the language in itself lacks certainty. Hence we can't say whether they have been applied in practice.
The methodology in the first paragraph does, but the methodology in the second paragraph uses something analogue to tension, but not tension.
100% Sure, that this is common. First paragraph measure the mass of small solid object and second paragraph weigh double star system. Let's keep C
I hope only jumps at you off the screen. This in itself red flags the answer option. Let's see what does the passage say. First paragraph measures the mass of small solid object, second weighs double star system. Firstly, double star system can't be small.Secondly, no where in the passage it says that the methodologies discussed may be used for small solid objects.
May be true for the methodology discussed in second paragraph, if you infer could infer this, but not for the one discussed in the first paragraph.
Dear anguyengt,
I hope the helps.

p1 - way to get mass in gravity free space.
P2 - Astronomers use case.
main point - informative/ illustrative approach to get mass in gravity free space.

Q1 :- It can be inferred from the passage that the two procedures described in the passage have which of the following in common?
spring method and star mass identification.
C Their purpose is to determine an unknown mass. -

----------------------------------------------

Q2 :- According to the passage, the tension in the string mentioned in highlight text is analogous to which of the following aspects of a double-star system?

B The gravitational attraction between the stars

---------------------------------------------

Q3 :- Which of the following best describes the relationship between the first and the second paragraph of the passage?
A The first paragraph provides an illustration useful for understanding a procedure described in the second paragraph. - right
B The first paragraph describes a hypothetical situation whose plausibility is tested in the second paragraph. - "plausibility is tested" is wrong
C The first paragraph evaluates the usefulness of a procedure whose application is described further in the second paragraph. - no
D The second paragraph provides evidence to support a claim made in the first paragraph. - no
E The second paragraph analyzes the practical implications of a methodology proposed in the first paragraph. - analyzes is not right

---------------------------------------------

Q4 :- The author of the passage mentions observations regarding the period of a double-star system as being useful for determining
P2 - By observing the time required for the stars to circle each other (the period) and measuring the distance between them, we can deduce the restraining force, and hence the masses.

D the degree of gravitational attraction between the system’s stars

VeritasKarishma GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo

can u explain question 4 why optin E is wrong?
can't we deduce period(time) and by knowing distance we would measure the speed.

Look at what the passage says:

The speed with which the two stars in a double-star system circle one another depends on the gravitational force between them, which holds the system together. This attractive force, analogous to the tension in the string, is proportional to the stars’ combined mass, according to Newton’s law of gravitation. By observing the time required for the stars to circle each other (the period) and measuring the distance between them, we can deduce the restraining force, and hence the masses.

4. The author of the passage mentions observations regarding the period of a double-star system as being useful for determining

A the distance between the two stars in the system
B the time it takes for each star to rotate on its axis
C the size of the orbit the system’s two stars occupy
D the degree of gravitational attraction between the system’s stars
E the speed at which the star system moves through space

Option (E) talks about the speed at which the star system moves through space. That is not mentioned anywhere in the passage.

Overall took 8 minutes to read and answer all questions and got all 5/5 correct

VeritasKarishma Can you please explain Question 5? Choice E mentions 'Scientists'. The passage does not mention Scientists anywhere.
I was stuck between Option B and E.

GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja
Could you explain the answer to question 4? Is it not mentioned in the passage that by observing the period we can deduce the force and masses?

"By observing the time required for the stars to circle each other (the period) and measuring the distance between them, we can deduce the restraining force, and hence the masses."
In that case, how is option D correct?

4. The author of the passage mentions observations regarding the period of a double-star system as being useful for determining

A the distance between the two stars in the system
B the time it takes for each star to rotate on its axis
C the size of the orbit the system’s two stars occupy
D the degree of gravitational attraction between the system’s stars
E the speed at which the star system moves through space

5. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. analyze a natural phenomenon in terms of its behavior under special conditions
B. describe the steps by which a scientific measurement is carried out
C. point out the conditions under which a scientific procedure is most useful
D. contrast two different uses of a methodological approach in science
E. explain a method by which scientists determine an unknown quantity

'Scientists' is a generic term used for people studying any kind of science so it is acceptable.

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).