In terms of economic impact, which of the following

[JacobW468]

Team, quick question on this verbal question:

--
Relevant part of passage:

"For several decades after its discovery, aluminum was considered a precious metal and was more costly than gold or platinum, not because of any fundamental scarcity, but because of its elevated cost of production. The price of aluminum suddenly plummeted in 1886, however, when two 23-year-old inventors independently developed an electrolytic process of separating pure aluminum from a bath of molten aluminum salts, primarily cryolite. Cryolite itself is rare enough that synthetic salts eventually replaced it as the solution medium."
--


In terms of economic impact, which of the following hypothetical situations would be most analogous to what the passage indicates happened in 1886?
(a) Fossil remains of a previously unknown dinosaur species are simultaneously discovered by two researchers working independently of one another.

(b) Lead-acid batteries are widely replaced in automobiles by batteries containing lithium, a much rarer metal than lead.

(c) Direct processing of light signals within fiber-optic devices supplants electronic signal processing performed by solid-state transistors.

(d) After supplies of a widely used commodity become unavailable, the price of the commodity surges.

(e) Low-cost artificial synthesis of diamonds, which are expensive to mine but composed of the common element carbon, is perfected.

The OA is (e). My questions are below:

(1) in OA, the low cost artificial process is already around is now "perfected". It seems like less of an innovation
than other answer choices. Can you help me out with understanding why this is the best answer (bc there's no way its perfect)?

(2) I just don't understand how new batteries (a seemingly innovative change like a new separation process is) isn't similar. When I reviewed I picked (c) and I'm still not sure why or what it really means here, but it sounds innovative as well (and uses the word process).

(3) Further, any general advice for analogy like problems? They can be hit or miss for me.

[ujjwal01.sunail]

You have to understand the flow of passage.

It tells:
[list=][/list] aluminum was precious after its discovery because of high production cost.
[list=][/list] It later became cheaper after the invention of electrolytic process.

Now look at option E.

Low-cost artificial synthesis of diamonds, which are expensive to mine but composed of the common element carbon, is perfected.

[list=][/list] diamond--- expensive to mine
[list=][/list] becomes cheap --- artificial synthesis

[JbhB682]

Bumping this topic as i have a question on E ...even though E is OA i have a doubt ...

The passage per my understanding says the following about 1886 in terms of the flow of events :

--- new process was discovered ---> previously expensive metal is now suddenly cheaper because of this new process

E however doesn't necessarily indicate its the same metal ..now with this new method, diamonds are being "synthesized" (to me, synthesized means "chemically created" or an "alternative" just with the same carbon element properties)

So yes there is a technological change but the diamonds with the new technology are being "Synthesized" hence its not talking about the same diamond which is suddenly much cheaper ..its talking about an alternative diamonds which may look or feel the same and is cheaper...

please assist

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

Good questions all round. This problem is an unusual one, because it asks for an analogy (comparison) between two situations. Clearly, we're interested to compare the important bits of the two situations.

(1) in OA, the low cost artificial process is already around is now "perfected". It seems like less of an innovation
than other answer choices. Can you help me out with understanding why this is the best answer (bc there's no way its perfect)?

Sure, we're asked for the 'most analogous' situation, and the question isn't designed to be easy. I would encourage you to think what the situation is in general terms, something like this: something is expensive because it's difficult to make, a new scientific method makes it easier to make, therefore it becomes cheaper. Note that I haven't been too specific, I just said 'something', 'make', etc. choosing pretty general words. This is what I'd do before looking at the answer choices.
Looking at answer A, don't be thrown off by the word 'perfected'. We don't exactly know what improvement or change there has been to the process of making synthetic diamonds. It could be a small innovation or it could be a big one. However, remember that, before 1886 it wasn't impossible to make aluminium, it was just very expensive. So the analogy seems pretty good.

(2) I just don't understand how new batteries (a seemingly innovative change like a new separation process is) isn't similar. When I reviewed I picked (c) and I'm still not sure why or what it really means here, but it sounds innovative as well (and uses the word process).

Sure, answer B is a bit similar (a new process), but there's no mention of the price of batteries or price of cars, so it's analogous to only part of the situation. The same applies to answer C, which uses the word 'process' as a distraction technique.

(3) Further, any general advice for analogy like problems? They can be hit or miss for me.

I would follow the method I used above: think about what the passage is saying in general terms before applying to the answer choices. Be careful of answers that are analogous to only some of the important details. Don't forget to engage with these passages in a simple way: ask what the passage is trying to convey that's interesting or unusual.

E however doesn't necessarily indicate its the same metal ..now with this new method, diamonds are being "synthesized" (to me, synthesized means "chemically created" or an "alternative" just with the same carbon element properties)

So yes there is a technological change but the diamonds with the new technology are being "Synthesized" hence its not talking about the same diamond which is suddenly much cheaper ..its talking about an alternative diamonds which may look or feel the same and is cheaper...

It's an analogy, not the same situation, so it doesn't need to be identical. Yes, there are differences between the processes, but both are making something in a cheaper way than was done before. In fact, the other scientific innovations mentioned in the other answer choices could well be analogues in a different context: say, if there was mention of price or demand.