It is currently 25 Sep 2017, 01:16

### 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

# Events & Promotions

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

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

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 65

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

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

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 14:48
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

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

VP
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 1112

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 0

Location: CA

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 14:57
C. Clay, the reason we couldnt find other planets with life is because we do not have sofisticated enough instruments. they may well exists.

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1704

Kudos [?]: 457 [0], given: 0

Location: Dhaka

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 15:40
I think it is B.
_________________

hey ya......

Kudos [?]: 457 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 17

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

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 17:37
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.

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

Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 896

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 17:44
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

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5210

Kudos [?]: 433 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2005, 22:18
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???

Kudos [?]: 433 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 232

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

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 01:21

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

Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 03:31
I think it is C for same reasons as kk1234

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 37

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

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

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 06:40
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.

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 482

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Location: Chicago

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 06:51
IMO it is between C and E

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

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 65

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

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 06:57
OA is C.

Unfortunately I dont have OE.

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

Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2005, 10:05
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.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 482

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Location: Chicago

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2005, 07:46
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

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

03 Oct 2005, 07:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by