GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 29 May 2020, 00:29

### 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

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

# There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an ind

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Status: You have to have the darkness for the dawn to come
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 271
Daboo: Sonu
GMAT 1: 590 Q49 V20
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an ind  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 26 Sep 2019, 22:58
1
3
Question 1
00:00

based on 202 sessions

67% (02:56) correct 33% (03:18) wrong

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00

based on 134 sessions

55% (01:23) correct 45% (01:18) wrong

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00

based on 143 sessions

52% (01:15) correct 48% (01:27) wrong

### HideShow timer Statistics

New Project RC Butler 2019 - Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday
Passage # 212, Date : 17-Jul-2019
This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019. Click here for Details

There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an indivisible shard of matter, without internal structure and without detectable shape or size. One might expect commensurate simplicity in the theories that describe such particles and the forces through which they interact; at the least, one might expect the structure of the world to be explained with a minimum number of particles and forces. Judged by this criterion of parsimony, a description of nature that has evolved in the past several years can be accounted a reasonable success. Matter is built out of just two elementary particles: the classes leptons, such as electrons, and the quarks, which make up protons, neutrons, and many related particles. Four basic forces act between the elementary particles. Gravitation and electromagnetism have long been familiar in the macroscopic world; the weak force and the strong force are observed only in subnuclear events.

An understanding of nature at this level is a remarkable achievement; nevertheless, it is possible to imagine what an even simpler theory might be like. Ideally, the two classes of elementary particles would be collapsed into one. Similarly, one force, rather than four, might explain all the particles' interactions. An ambitious new theory now promises at least a partial unification along these lines. The theory does not embrace gravitation, which is by far the feeblest of the forces and may be fundamentally different from the others. If gravitation is excluded, however, the theory unifies all elementary particles and forces.

The first step in constructing the unified theory was demonstrating that the weak, the strong, and the electromagnetic forces could all be described by theories of the same general type. During this development, a deep connection was discovered between the weak force and electromagnetism, a connection that hinted at still grander synthesis. The new theory incorporated the leptons and the quarks into a single family and showed that one type of particle can transform into the other. At the same time the weak, the strong, and the electromagnetic forces are understood as aspects of a single underlying force. Thus, the theory is a model of frugality.
1. The author organizes the passage by

A) enumerating distinctions among several different kinds of elementary particles
B) stating a criterion for judging theories of nature, and using it to evaluate two theories
C) explaining three methods of grouping particles and forces
D) criticizing an inaccurate view of elemental nature and proposing an alternative approach
E) outlining an assumption about scientific verification, then criticizing the assumption

2. According to the passage, which of the following is true of quarks?

I. They are the elementary building blocks of neutrons.
II. Scientists have described them as having no internal structure.
III. Some scientists group them with leptons in a single class of particles.

A) I only
B) III only
C) I and II only
D) II and III only
E) I, II, and III

3. It can be inferred that the author would be likely to consider a new theory of nature superior to present theories if it were to

A) account for a larger number of macroscopic structures than present theories
B) reduce the four basic forces to two more fundamental, incompatible forces
C) propose a smaller number of fundamental particles and forces than current theories
D) successfully account for the observable behavior of bodies due to gravity
E) hypothesize that protons but not neutrons are formed by combinations of more fundamental particles

Originally posted by daboo343 on 04 Jun 2017, 07:26.
Last edited by SajjadAhmad on 26 Sep 2019, 22:58, edited 4 times in total.
Updated - Complete topic (698).
Manager
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 90
Re: There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an ind  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2019, 11:22
2
1

A) enumerating distinctions among several different kinds of elementary particles : No such distinctions are presented in the passage. We only know the class they belong to
B) stating a criterion for judging theories of nature, and using it to evaluate two theories
C) explaining three methods of grouping particles and forces : There are just two methods described. One is the existing one and the other is the proposed /proffered one
D) criticizing an inaccurate view of elemental nature and proposing an alternative approach : the author does not criticize, rather he applauds. "An understanding of nature at this level is a remarkable achievement; "
E) outlining an assumption about scientific verification, then criticizing the assumption: The author does not criticize. no clear assumption is stated

Therefore option B

I. They are the elementary building blocks of neutrons.
II. Scientists have described them as having no internal structure.
III. Some scientists group them with leptons in a single class of particles.

I-mentioned in the para 1. Matter is built out of just two elementary particles: the classes leptons, such as electrons, and the quarks, which make up protons, neutrons,
II- mentioned in para 1.elementary particle: it is an indivisible shard of matter, without internal structure and without detectable shape or size.
III- mentioned in paragraph 1. Matter is built out of just two elementary particles: the classes leptons, such as electrons, and the quarks, which make up protons, neutrons,

Therefore option E

All other options except C and D should be easy to eliminate.
Option D is not correct since the author does not seem to indicate whether he considers the force of gravity on bodies to be an important factor in the qualification of a theory. All that is mentioned in the passage is "successfully account for the observable behavior of bodies due to gravity "
The author only seems to be interested in unifying the forces into one category and all particles into another

Therefore option C wins
VP
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 1031
Re: There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an ind  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Oct 2019, 01:07
question 3 is hard
choice c can be infered from the first sentence of paragraph 2.

we do not feel what answer choice is correct. we look for the sentence, the word, which yield the information needed to answer.
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2017
Posts: 427
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: IIM
GMAT 1: 620 Q47 V30
GPA: 3
WE: Corporate Finance (Commercial Banking)
Re: There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an ind  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Oct 2019, 16:26
Kindly provide OE for Q1 and Q3
Re: There can be nothing simpler than an elementary particle: it is an ind   [#permalink] 31 Oct 2019, 16:26