The consensus among astronomers, based upon observations of the surface of pulsars, is that pulsars are spinning ball of neutrons compressed into a sphere some 10 kilometers in diameter with a mass roughly equal to that of our sun. However, their observed properties are also consistent with some pulsars actually being filled with quarks, the building blocks of neutrons. Because the core of a
quark-filled pulsar, unlike a neutron-filled one, would have an overall positive charge, it would attract a layer of negatively charged particles that could support a crust of neutrons.
The statement that the core of a quark-filled pulsar would have an overall positive charge plays which one of the following
roles in the argument above?
(A) It helps explain how pulsars could have neutrons on their surface even if they were not entirely made up of neutrons.
Yeah, As in the argument it tries to provide an explanation.
Because the core of a quark-filled pulsar, unlike a neutron-filled one, would have an overall positive charge, it would attract a layer of negatively charged particles that could support a crust of neutrons.
(B) It forms part of a challenge to the claim that some pulsars may be made up of quarks
Although this fact is true that's not the role it plays. (C) It helps explain why some pulsars would not be readily recognized as such by astronomers
Nerver mentioned in the argument(D) It presents a new finding that challenges the consensus view of the structure of pulsars
Although this fact is true that's not the role(E) It points out a problem with the view that pulsars have a mass roughly equal to that of our sun
Irrelavent