To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 Feb 2017, 08:31

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 65
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 13:48
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

To the editor:

In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model for determining whether extraterrestrial life exists. It was based on the assumptions that life as we know it could exist only on a planet and that many stars are, like our Sun, orbited by planets. On the basis that there are nine panets in our solar system and one of them has life as we know it, the astonomer predicted that there are as many as one million extraterrestrial civilizations accross all solar systems. Yet astronomers to date have not detected even one planet outside our solar system. This indicates that the astronomer's model is wrong, and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth.

--- Clay Moltz ---

Which one of the following, if accepted by Clay Moltz, would require him to reconsider his conclusion ?

A. Forms of life other than life as we know it exist on other planets.

B. There are many stars that are not orbited by planets.

C. Detecting planets outside our solar system requires more sophisticated instruments than are currently available.

D. The soundness of the conclusion reached by applying a mathematical model depends on the soundness of the assumptions on which the model is based.

E. Due to sheer distances and expanses of space involved, any extraterrestrial civilization would have great difficulty communicating with ours.

OA to follow
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
VP
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 1120
Location: CA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 13:57
C. Clay, the reason we couldnt find other planets with life is because we do not have sofisticated enough instruments. they may well exists.
SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1723
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 340 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 14:40
I think it is B.
_________________

hey ya......

Intern
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 16:37
I pick C

Conclusion: astronomer's model is wrong, and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth

Conclusion based on the fact: astronomers to date have not detected even one planet outside our solar system

Answer choice C gives another explaination of why astronomers have not detected even one planet outside our solar system that will weaken the conclusion.
Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 905
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 16:44
D because if the assumption on which the model is built is not sound, then the conclusion of the model wont be sound either.

A is wrong because forms of life as we know it is what we are concerned about not other forms of life.

B is wrong because it is irrelevant

C is wrong becuase planet detection is not the issue here, it's detecting life as we know it in planets outside our solar system

E is out of scope
Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5238
Followers: 26

Kudos [?]: 381 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 21:18
C is wrong because it compares technology of today to that of 1960.

B is consistent with the passage.

A and E are irrelevant.

Therefore D.

How could such a conclusion be made without an accurate model which employed 1960 technology and was based on sound assumptions at the time???
Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 235
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 00:21
C please post OA
Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 134
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 02:31
I think it is C for same reasons as kk1234
Intern
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 38
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Astronomer (GMATPlus Test 1 #37 ) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 05:40
C is the correct answer. The conclusion is based on the fact that because the astronomers haven't detected it, it can't be true. Thus, we need an answer which suggest that astronomers may not know enough to be 100% accurate.

C. Detecting planets outside our solar system requires more sophisticated instruments than are currently available.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 484
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 05:51
IMO it is between C and E

I am not sure how to reject E....
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 65
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 05:57
OA is C.

Unfortunately I dont have OE.
Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 134
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 09:05
ranga41, E does not say anything that contradicts the theory. We need a statement that tells us that we have not discovered any planet for a reason, but that those planets can exist and therefore the astronomers argument can still hold.

E is irrelevant as the text does not say anything about communication between civilizations.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 484
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2005, 06:46
jdtomatito wrote:
ranga41, E does not say anything that contradicts the theory. We need a statement that tells us that we have not discovered any planet for a reason, but that those planets can exist and therefore the astronomers argument can still hold.

E is irrelevant as the text does not say anything about communication between civilizations.

Agreed,

Thanks
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

03 Oct 2005, 06:46
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 A survey of alumni of the class of 1960 2 05 Apr 2015, 07:20
3 Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker 4 25 Aug 2014, 12:22
3 Astronomer: Proponents of the hypothesis that life evolved 2 08 Nov 2013, 01:29
8 According to some astronomers, Earth is struck by a 13 15 Mar 2011, 21:49
Copernicus s astronomical system is superior to Ptolemy s 4 12 Nov 2007, 12:43
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO 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®.