GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 20 Mar 2019, 10:30

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

Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about

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

Hide Tags

 
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2015
Posts: 6
Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2015, 14:41
3
Question 1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 65 sessions

76% (02:51) correct 24% (03:36) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 69 sessions

66% (01:47) correct 34% (01:26) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 68 sessions

49% (01:50) correct 51% (01:57) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 60 sessions

77% (00:47) correct 23% (00:59) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about the solar system unaccompanied by satellites. These astronomers assumed this because they considered asteroidsatellite systems inherently unstable. Theoreticians could have told them otherwise: even minuscule bodies in the solar system can theoretically have satellites, as long as everything is in proper scale. If a bowling ball were orbiting about the Sun in the asteroid belt, it could have a pebble orbiting it as far away as a few hundred radii (or about 50 meters) without losing the pebble to the Sun’s gravitational pull.

Observations now suggest that asteroid satellites may exist not only in theory but also in reality. Several astronomers have noticed, while watching asteroids pass briefly in front of stars, that something besides the known asteroid sometimes blocks out the star as well. Is that something a satellite?

The most convincing such report concerns the asteroid Herculina, which was due to pass in front of a star in 1978. Astronomers waiting for the predicted event found not just one occultation, or eclipse, of the star, but two distinct drops in brightness. One was the predicted occultation, exactly on time. The other, lasting about five seconds, preceded the predicted event by about two minutes. The presence of a secondary body near Herculina thus seemed strongly indicated. To cause the secondary occultation, an unseen satellite would have to be about 45 kilometers in diameter, a quarter of the size of Herculina, and at a distance of 990 kilometers from the asteroid at the time. These values are within theoretical bounds, and such an asteroid-satellite pair could be stable.

With the Herculina event, apparent secondary occultations became “respectable”—and more commonly reported. In fact, so common did reports of secondary events become that they are now simply too numerous for all of them to be accurate. Even if every asteroid has as many satellites as can be fitted around it without an undue number of collisions, only one in every hundred primary occultations would be accompanied by a secondary event (one in every thousand if asteroidal satellite systems resembled those of the planets).

Yet even astronomers who find the case for asteroid satellites unconvincing at present say they would change their minds if a photoelectric record were made of a well-behaved secondary event. By “well-behaved” they mean that during occultation the observed brightness must drop sharply as the star winks out and must rise sharply as it reappears from behind the obstructing object, but the brightness during the secondary occultation must drop to that of the asteroid, no higher and no lower. This would make it extremely unlikely that an airplane or a glitch in the instruments was masquerading as an occulting body.


1. According to the passage, the attitude of astronomers toward asteroid satellites since the Herculina event can best be described as

(A) open-mindedness combined with a concern for rigorous standards of proof
(B) contempt for and impatience with the position held by theoreticians
(C) bemusement at a chaotic mix of theory, inadequate or spurious data, and calls for scientific rigor
(D) hardheaded skepticism, implying rejection of all data not recorded automatically by state-ofthe-art instruments
(E) admiration for the methodical process by which science progresses from initial hypothesis to incontrovertible proof




2. The author implies that which one of the following was true prior to reports of the Herculina event?

(A) Since no good theoretical model existed, all claims that reports of secondary occultations were common were disputed.
(B) Some of the reported observations of secondary occultations were actually observations of collisions of satellites with one another.
(C) If there were observations of phenomena exactly like the phenomena now labeled secondary occultations, astronomers were less likely then to have reported such observations.
(D) The prevailing standards concerning what to classify as a well-behaved secondary event were less stringent than they are now.
(E) Astronomers were eager to publish their observations of occultations of stars by satellites of asteroids.




3. The information presented in the passage implies which one of the following about the frequency of reports of secondary occultations after the Herculina event?

(A) The percentage of reports of primaryoccultations that also included reports of secondary occultations increased tenfold compared to the time before the Herculina event.
(B) Primary occultations by asteroids were reported to have been accompanied by secondary occultations in about one out of every thousand cases.
(C) The absolute number of reports of secondary occultations increased tenfold compared to the time before the Herculina event.
(D) Primary occultations by asteroids were reported to have been accompanied by secondary occultations in more than one out of every hundred cases.
(E) In more than one out of every hundred cases, primary occultations were reported to have been accompanied by more than one secondary occultation.




4. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) cast doubt on existing reports of secondary occultations of stars
(B) describe experimental efforts by astronomers to separate theoretically believable observations of satellites of asteroids from spurious ones
(C) review the development of ideas among astronomers about whether or not satellites of asteroids exist
(D) bring a theoretician’s perspective to bear on an incomplete discussion of satellites of asteroids
(E) illustrate the limits of reasonable speculation concerning the occultation of stars



Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 02 Oct 2009
Posts: 443
GMAT 1: 530 Q47 V17
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
WE: Business Development (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2015, 20:21
1
Pretty decent Passage. good for Practice. Got all the questions correct.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2014
Posts: 14
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Sep 2015, 23:01
(1) A
A. The opening line of the passage tells us that the astronomers were skeptical about astroid satellite systems ( "until recently many...."). In the 2nd para, the existence of such system became "respectable" (post Herculina). This marks a change in attitude. However, astronomers are not completely convinced. They are willing to change their minds if more proof is available.
B. The astronomers show no dislike for theoreticians or with the position held by theoreticians. In fact, astronomical observations are cross checked with theoretical values to provide more verifiable conclusion.
C. The astronomers are not bemused at the chaotic mix of theory. What was stated by the theory is in fact observed the the astronomers & the collective output of both parties have led to a change in the astronomer's attitude. However, some of them call for more scientific data.
D. As stated in (A), skepticism transitioned into open mindedness. Therefore, choice D is wrong.
E. As stated in the last para, the astronomers call for verifiable scientific data to consider the hypothesis as true. Incontrovertible proof is yet to be established.

(2) C
A. Theories were eventually backed by observations as true. Secondary occultations gave support to the hypothesis developed by theoreticians.
B. Nothing has been mentioned to link secondary occultations to collisions.
C. Para e begins, "Observations NOW suggest....exist not only in theory....also reality" meaning prior observations of such occultations were less likely to have been reported.
D. Prior to Heruclian, "well-behaved" secondary event standards did not exist, therefore there were no "prevailing standards"
E. Astronomers observed secondary occultations..this changed their views on asteroid-satellite system..Were they eager to publish it? We cannot infer.

(3) D
A. % Increased 10X compared to the time prior to Herculina. Not implied. Especially since we have not been given any no. of Sec.Occ. prior to Herculina or post.
B. The only time 1/1000 case is mentioned is in para 2...to existence of asteroid satellite system if it resembles those of the planets.
C. As stated in (A), we do have have any "10X" or "absolute" number
D. Para 2 clearly states ...1/100 asteroid would be accompanied by a secondary event.
E. "more than one secondary occultaion'? No such thing has been mentioned. Para2

(4) C
A. Firstly, reports of secondary occultations are recent findings not existent. Secondly, such findings have not be subjected to doubt but accepted with some reservations
B. Separate theoretical hypothesis to spurious ones? Experimental efforts? Astronomers simply found new revelations that gave some traction to the hypothesis
C. The concept of asteroid-satellite system has seen incremental gains. The author reviews these development.
D. The passage weighs in the astronomers' views on the topic...and introduces the theoretical view..The discussion on the topic has never been incomplete but rather different due to the lack of verifiable data. Subsequent lines show that with the findings of such data..the discussion leads to a more substantial , if not conclusive, end.
E. In the 3rd para, astronomers seek data from experimental observation to consider the hypothesis as true. But this alone is not the primary purpose of the passage.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 31 Aug 2016
Posts: 266
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V37
GPA: 2.81
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Feb 2019, 09:56
1
hi SajjadAhmad
its a LSAT passage. Please modify the tags.
_________________

Resources
GMATNinja Webinars
GMATNinja Chats

Quant
Mixtures

GMAT Club Bot
Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about   [#permalink] 15 Feb 2019, 09:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Until recently many astronomers believed that asteroids travel about

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.