Hi Dear
ssaammvishumangalVerbal33May your doubts get cleared.
Official Explanation
3. A scientist makes new observations and learns that water waves of shorter wavelengths spread in all directions not only because they scatter off piers but also because they interact with previously scattered short water waves. Drawing upon the analogy between water waves and light waves, we might hypothesize which of the following?
Explanation
This is an application question since it introduces new information about water waves and asks us to conclude how the behavior of light waves might be similarly affected. Given this information, however, we can justify no conclusion about whether light waves imitate water waves in this new regard. The analogy might hold or it might break down. We don’t yet know. (To find out we would have to do an experiment using light.)
The answer is (D).
5. From the information presented in the passage, what can we conclude about the color of the sky on a day with a large quantity of dust in the air?
Explanation
(A): No. Although dust is mentioned as one of the three important obstacles (lines 16–17), we simply do not have enough information to conclude how dust density would change sky color.
(B): No. While this idea may fit with the common lore that a lot of dust in the air creates great, red sunsets, the passage itself gives no basis to any conclusion regarding color change.
(C): No. Same reason as in (A) and (B).
(D): Yes. There is not enough information in the passage to determine a relationship between color change and dust density. The dust may give off a certain color of its own—we can’t say for certain.
The answer is (D).
6. We all know that when there is a clear sky, the western sky appears red as the sun sets. From the information presented in the passage, this phenomenon would seem to be explained by which of the following?
Explanation
Statement I is true. There are obviously more particles on a horizontal than a vertical path. The glowing red sky is reasonable evidence for some diffusion. Note that Question 5 asks “what can we conclude” while this question asks what seems plausible (what “would seem to be explained”). So, while we are attempting to make very similar inferences in both questions, what we can do with the data depends, among other things, on the degree of certainty requested.
Statement II is true. The path of evening light probably has a greater average density, since it spends more time passing through a zone of thicker atmosphere. It is reasonable to assume this significantly greater density, or the absolute number of particles, might present an obstacle to blue light.
Statement III is false. There are two things wrong with this answer: (1) red light waves are not short, relative to blue; (2) we do not know that waves with more energy will more readily pass through obstacles. The passage, in fact, implies just the opposite.
The answer is (C).
7. Which one of the following does the author seem to imply?
Explanation
(A): No. Water waves offer only a model for light waves. As a model, they are identical in some ways but not in others.
(B): No. This is not implied by the passage. What they have in common is the way they act when they impinge on obstacles.
(C): No. Waves of water are used as a model because they have much in common with waves of light.
(D): Yes. See explanation for (A).
The answer is (D).
Hope it helps