Last visit was: 02 Sep 2026, 21:03 It is currently 02 Sep 2026, 21:03
Close
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Amity007
Joined: 12 Sep 2025
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 266
Own Kudos:
490
 [2]
Given Kudos: 1,849
Location: India
Schools: ISB
Products:
Schools: ISB
Posts: 266
Kudos: 490
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
ThickRiver
Joined: 02 Aug 2026
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
15
 [1]
Posts: 23
Kudos: 15
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
officiisnobis
Joined: 24 Feb 2026
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 99
Own Kudos:
18
 [1]
Given Kudos: 81
Products:
Posts: 99
Kudos: 18
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 6,287
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 715
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,287
Kudos: 33,892
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi officiisnobis,

Hypothesis 1 never uses the word "shaping," which is why it looks like it says nothing about the surface. Look at this line in its tab:

"volcanoes are a means by which the shrinking planet expels matter it can no longer contain."

That matter is expelled onto the surface. Material coming up and out through volcanoes changes what the surface looks like, so Hypothesis 1 does treat volcanic activity as a real surface process, sitting alongside the crumpling that makes mountains and the shifting that causes earthquakes.

Why that settles Statement 1 as True. The statement asks only whether both camps would agree that volcanic activity plays a major role. They do not have to agree on how:

- Hypothesis 1: volcanoes expel matter as the planet contracts.
- Hypothesis 2: volcanoes break the crust into continents.

Both treat it as significant surface work, so the shared point holds.

The trap is hunting for matching wording. "Expels matter" is the same claim as "shaping," in plainer clothes. On a both-agree statement, check each tab for the underlying claim, not the vocabulary.

Answer: True, False, True

officiisnobis
for statement 1-
How in hypothesis 1 is it shaping the earth's surface?


User avatar
officiisnobis
Joined: 24 Feb 2026
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 99
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 81
Products:
Posts: 99
Kudos: 18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks for replying.
When I read it I understood that shaping will be something that changed the surface and I could not determine that "Earthquakes are also caused by this shifting, while volcanoes are a means by which the shrinking planet expels matter it can no longer contain." meant it changed. (which of course it did)


egmat
Hi officiisnobis,

Hypothesis 1 never uses the word "shaping," which is why it looks like it says nothing about the surface. Look at this line in its tab:

"volcanoes are a means by which the shrinking planet expels matter it can no longer contain."

That matter is expelled onto the surface. Material coming up and out through volcanoes changes what the surface looks like, so Hypothesis 1 does treat volcanic activity as a real surface process, sitting alongside the crumpling that makes mountains and the shifting that causes earthquakes.

Why that settles Statement 1 as True. The statement asks only whether both camps would agree that volcanic activity plays a major role. They do not have to agree on how:

- Hypothesis 1: volcanoes expel matter as the planet contracts.
- Hypothesis 2: volcanoes break the crust into continents.

Both treat it as significant surface work, so the shared point holds.

The trap is hunting for matching wording. "Expels matter" is the same claim as "shaping," in plainer clothes. On a both-agree statement, check each tab for the underlying claim, not the vocabulary.

Answer: True, False, True


avatar
ArmaanBajaj
Joined: 11 Aug 2024
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 27
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 12
GMAT Focus 1: 625 Q81 V81 DI81
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 625 Q81 V81 DI81
Posts: 27
Kudos: 8
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Any solid reason why this is true?

Earth???s average number of earthquakes per year: 512,000 ??? Hypothesis 1
User avatar
EvenCloth
Joined: 18 Apr 2026
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 5
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 5
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Why I chose S1 True because you can see that in both hypotheses it has been clearly mentioned what volcanoes eruption did to the earth’s surface so basically yes it is playing a major role in shaping the earth’s surface.
S2 is false because simply you can see radio activity has been introduced only in hypotheses 2 not in 1 but we need statements to be true if it has been introduced in both hypotheses.
Lastly S3 is True because in both hypotheses it has been indirectly saying core is molten and molten I assume it’s lava and yes the core is hotter than the surface .
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 6,287
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 715
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,287
Kudos: 33,892
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi ArmaanBajaj,

The key here is what "consistent with" actually asks. It does not ask whether Hypothesis 1 predicts exactly 512,000 earthquakes, or even predicts a rise. It asks whether that number conflicts with anything Hypothesis 1 says. If nothing in the hypothesis rules it out, it's consistent - True.

Now look at the Hypothesis 1 tab. It says the earth is still cooling and contracting, and that earthquakes are "caused by this shifting" of the rigid crust as the core keeps contracting. Two things follow:

- The shifting is described as an ongoing process - it hasn't stopped.
- So earthquakes keep happening, and nothing in the tab caps their number or says they should decline.

An increase from 500,000 to 512,000 sits comfortably with an active, ongoing shifting process. Since Hypothesis 1 gives us no reason to expect earthquakes to fall, a higher number doesn't contradict it - so it's True.

Contrast this with statement (1) about circumference: Hypothesis 2 explicitly says the earth keeps expanding, so a shrinking circumference directly conflicts with it - False. That's what a real contradiction looks like. Statement (2) has no such conflict.

A quick way to feel the difference:
- Rule: "The bakery bakes bread every morning."
- Observation: "Today they baked 12 more loaves than yesterday."

Does the extra 12 contradict the rule? No - the rule never fixed a quantity, it just said baking keeps happening. You'd mark that consistent, even though the rule never predicted an increase. Same logic here: ongoing shifting + more earthquakes = no conflict = True.

Answer: False, True, True

ArmaanBajaj
Any solid reason why this is true?

Earth???s average number of earthquakes per year: 512,000 ??? Hypothesis 1
Moderators:
Math Expert
113061 posts
DI Forum Moderator
410 posts