There are just two ways a moon could have been formed from the planet

Question

Competition Mode Question

There are just two ways a moon could have been formed from the planet around which it travels: either part of the planet’s outer shell spun off into orbit around the planet or else a large object, such as a comet or meteoroid struck the planet so violently that it dislodged a mass of material from inside the planet. Earth’s moon consists primarily of materials different from those of the Earth’s outer shell.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following, if also true, would most help to justify drawing the conclusion that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth?

If the statements above are true, which one of the following, if also true, would most help to justify drawing the conclusion that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth?

(A) The moons of some planets in Earth’s solar system were not formed primarily from the planets’ outer shells.

(B) Earth’s moon consists primarily of elements that differ from those inside the Earth.

(C) Earth’s gravity cannot have trapped a meteoroid and pulled it into orbit as the Moon.

(D) The craters on the surface of Earth’s moon show that it has been struck by many thousands of large meteoroids.

(E) Comets and large meteoroids normally move at very high speeds.

exc4libur · Answer

ARGUMENT
  moon formed from planet by the spun off of planet's outer shell;
  moon formed from planet by dislodging mass from inside the planet;
  Earth's moon material is different from outer shell;
  if the moon is not from outer shell, then it could be from the inside.

JUSTIFY THE MOON IS NOT FROM PLANET

Ans (B) if the moon's material is different from outer shell and inside of the planet, then it is not formed from the EARTH.

eakabuah · Answer

B is the right answer.

If it is concluded that the Earth's moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth, then there should be no evidence of any physical characteristics of the earth on the moon. Because the statements above clearly state that there are just two ways a moon could be formed from the planet around which it travels:
1. part of the planets spun off into orbit around the planet
2. a large object struck the planet so violently that it dislodged a mass of material from the planet.
If the moon is formed through either case, the moon will have similar elements on its surface as the earth. On the contrary, if the moon is not formed from a piece of the Earth, then there should be no similarity between the elements on earth and those on the moon. Based on this, option B is the right answer.

This is out of scope. The fact that moons of other planets were not formed primarily from the planet's outer shell is not enough grounds to conclude that earth's moon was not formed from a piece of the earth. We don't know how moons of other planets are formed; we only know the two possible way that the earth's moon can be formed.

Correct per the reasoning above.

This is out of scope since this information is not presented as one of the two ways in which a moon can be formed from the Earth's surface in the statements above.

Striking of the surface of the earth's moon by many meteoroids does not provide any evidence that the earth's moon was not formed by part of the earth's mass. This information is irrelevant.

The speed of commets and large meteoroids is irrelevant in determining whether the moon was formed from the earth's mass.

madgmat2019 · Answer

(A) The moons of some planets in Earth’s solar system were not formed primarily from the planets’ outer shells........Earth’s moon consists primarily of materials different from those of the Earth’s outer shell.......it's also given in last sentence..... nothing new info.....Also if it's for other planets then it's not mandate for earth.....INCORRECT

(B) Earth’s moon consists primarily of elements that differ from those inside the Earth......This clearly helps in saying that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth..... CORRECT

(C) Earth’s gravity cannot have trapped a meteoroid and pulled it into orbit as the Moon.......So this says moon should be part of earth which weakens the required conclusion.... INCORRECT

(D) The craters on the surface of Earth’s moon show that it has been struck by many thousands of large meteoroids.......That's doesn't mean that it's not part of Earth.... INCORRECT

(E) Comets and large meteoroids normally move at very high speeds.....OUT OF CONTEXT..... INCORRECT

OA:B

Posted from my mobile device

unraveled · Answer

There are just two ways a moon could have been formed from the planet around which it travels: either part of the planet’s outer shell spun off into orbit around the planet or else a large object, such as a comet or meteoroid struck the planet so violently that it dislodged a mass of material from inside the planet. Earth’s moon consists primarily of materials different from those of the Earth’s outer shell.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following, if also true, would most help to justify drawing the conclusion that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth?

If the statements above are true, which one of the following, if also true, would most help to justify drawing the conclusion that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth?

(A) The moons of some planets in Earth’s solar system were not formed primarily from the planets’ outer shells. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

(B) Earth’s moon consists primarily of elements that differ from those inside the Earth. - CORRECT. Directly relates to the argument's other part that if teh moon's material is not from inside of the Earth then its not a piece of Earth.

(C) Earth’s gravity cannot have trapped a meteoroid and pulled it into orbit as the Moon. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

(D) The craters on the surface of Earth’s moon show that it has been struck by many thousands of large meteoroids. - WRONG. Doesn't relate anything.

(E) Comets and large meteoroids normally move at very high speeds. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

IMO Answer B.

razorhell · Answer

Ans A

This means we need a statement which justifies that the moon can form by the meteroid as well

(A)  The moons of some planets in Earth’s solar system were not formed primarily from the planets’ outer shells.

(B)  Earth’s moon consists primarily of elements that differ from those inside the Earth.  Irrevant

(C) Earth’s gravity cannot have trapped a meteoroid and pulled it into orbit as the Moon. Irrevant

(D) The craters on the surface of Earth’s moon show that it has been struck by many thousands of large meteoroids.  Irrevant

(E) Comets and large meteoroids normally move at very high speeds.  Irrevant

chaitralirr · Answer

There are just two ways a moon could have been formed from the planet around which it travels: either part of the planet’s outer shell spun off into orbit around the planet or else a large object, such as a comet or meteoroid struck the planet so violently that it dislodged a mass of material from inside the planet. Earth’s moon consists primarily of materials different from those of the Earth’s outer shell.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following, if also true, would most help to justify drawing the conclusion that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth?

Stimulus: states that there are two ways through which moon can be formed 1) part of the planet gets comes out of the outer shell 2) the planet gets hit by meteoroid so violently that it dislodges a mass of material from inside the planet.

However Earths moon does not have elements similar to Earth.
 
If the statements above are true, which one of the following, if also true, would most help to justify drawing the conclusion that Earth’s moon was not formed from a piece of the Earth?

(A) The moons of some planets in Earth’s solar system were not formed primarily from the planets’ outer shells.  IMO A. Shows a similar analogy for planets in earths solar system

(B) Earth’s moon consists primarily of elements that differ from those inside the Earth.  Similar to stimulus does not provide any additional information

(C) Earth’s gravity cannot have trapped a meteoroid and pulled it into orbit as the Moon.  Refuting the conclusion

(D) The craters on the surface of Earth’s moon show that it has been struck by many thousands of large meteoroids.  Again goes against the conclusion that may be the outer surface got struck many times and so the elements do not match

(E) Comets and large meteoroids normally move at very high speeds.  irrelevant and does not relate to stimulus

IMO A

There are just two ways a moon could have been formed from the planet

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

There are just two ways a moon could have been formed from the planet

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards