Q8

[zhangstagangsta]

Could someone explain why A is wrong and why E is right? I feel that E addresses the later part of the passage more, not the passage as a whole.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Answer choices (A) and (E) are very different. But I like this problem as I find the subject interesting.

If you think about the purpose of this passage it is to discover which of the three competing theories is correct.

1) LHB is the disintegration of an asteroid/comet (lines 18-22)

2) LHB is not a cataclysmic event and represents the slow decline of a heavy bombardment of the inner solar system (lines 23-32)

3) LHB is cataclysmic but only centered on the moon/earth system (lines 32-37)

The passage is finally unsuccessful in determining which of the three is correct but finds evidence that would seem to refute at least the last theory.

Answer choice (A) simply describes what the LHB is but never really goes so far as an analysis of which of the competing theories is the correct one.

While answer choice (E) doesn't actually say which of the theories is correct (neither does the passage) it puts forward an understanding of the passage that there are competing theories out there and we would like to know which of them is the correct one.

[ttunden]

I was able to narrow it down to A and E but I thought E was too narrow. It really only summarized the last paragraph.

A summarizes the majority of the passage and I thought the last part of A was referring to the last paragraph.

[ying_yingjj]

I noticed that A was too certain for the LHB theory, as if there is no other possibilities.

I agree E is too narrow. A-E there is not one answer was a good answer. It's just a dumb question, I think.

[mshinners]

I noticed that A was too certain for the LHB theory, as if there is no other possibilities.

I agree E is too narrow. A-E there is not one answer was a good answer. It's just a dumb question, I think.

Nope! E isn't too narrow, in that in encompasses all of the passage. Our first paragraph describes the LHB, which is brought up in (E). Our second paragraph brings up the alternative theories, all of which are referenced in (E) ("before competing theories..."). And, finally, our last paragraph - the most important paragraph, as we get the author's attitude - is reflected the most in this answer. The author brings up the background and theories in order to discuss the new evidence found, and how it's inconclusive.

[CalPoliScience2016]

I noticed that A was too certain for the LHB theory, as if there is no other possibilities.

I agree E is too narrow. A-E there is not one answer was a good answer. It's just a dumb question, I think.

Nope! E isn't too narrow, in that in encompasses all of the passage. Our first paragraph describes the LHB, which is brought up in (E). Our second paragraph brings up the alternative theories, all of which are referenced in (E) ("before competing theories..."). And, finally, our last paragraph - the most important paragraph, as we get the author's attitude - is reflected the most in this answer. The author brings up the background and theories in order to discuss the new evidence found, and how it's inconclusive.

For me, I chose A because the phrase "perhaps on other members" sounded like information on LHB was inconclusive, and there was considerable debate about how it occurred. I interpreted this a reference to the theories mentioned in the passage. But I guess I was thinkign too much about it!

[BenY219]

A little late to this discussion, but I'd like to clarify: When we are thinking about the main point of a passage, should we been seeking to find an answer choice that fully covers the entire passage (summarizes) or states the main point?

I agree that E summarizes the passage best, but if I were to look for a "main point," still have a feeling as if A is the better answer.

[LolaC289]

I think there are two things concerning why (A) is not a good answer.

First, I'm not sure if the LHB should be called "an intense meteorite bombardment". From all we know, only theory one said "LHB was linked to the disintegration of an asteroid or comet." (ll.18-19). "Meteorite" only showed once in the whole passage, in line 43, where the "meteorite" was presented as the evidence of existence of LHB. In my head, LHB is better called an asteroid/comet bombardment which caused meteorite debris to pepper other planets. But either is not confirmed by the author himself.

Second, as previous posts have pointed out, (A)'s tone is too assertive for this passage, and it didn't catch the main discussion at all. The structure of this passage can be seen as scientific background- competing theories- supplementary evidence &future vision. (A) covered at most para.1, which is only some background info, while (E) caught the main discussion in para.2 & para.3.

According to ohthatpatrick (my fav tutor on the forum!!!), finding "MVS" (most valuable sentences) can help us to find the gist of the passage & the author's attitude. For me the MVS in this passage are mainly ll.12-16 "various theoretical approaches......" ll.40-43 "New support......" & ll.53-57 "However, to determine...... scientists will need to ......". Seems like the author has a slight tendency to theory 1&2 which claim LHB extended to the whole inner solar system, but was not assertive at last because he thinks further evidences are needed. Thus this passage is more of an inquiry than of a confirmation, the author's attitude is more neutral than assertive. That pushes us closer to (E) than (A).

For others,
(B) is not supported.
(C) is a misinterpretation of ll.53-57
(D) is factually inaccurate. From all we know, LHB was linked to a large body (line 20), not a small one.

[abrenza123]

I'm a little confused about some of these MP questions - it seems like some answers are much more narrow in focus (more specifically referencing one paragraph or the last paragraph) while others encapsulate/glean from the entire passage. For this question, I was drawn to A because I thought it was the most general and the part about the inner solar systems referenced the discussion in the last paragraph. I get that It didn't really talk about the second paragraph and "possibly other planets" in the inner solar system is VERY broad, because I think you can infer the scientists are debating that it impacted at least the moon and another planet, but I thought that E didn't really talk about the first paragraph and was very specific to the last paragraph. Also, does the consequences of LHB for live on earth imply a reason why scientists are interested in studying it?

In contrast, PT 45 S2 P3 , the MP question 15 doesn't talk about the third paragraph/implications of the new findings for Lichen at ALL, but does talk about the new research. In my head, it was more broadly encompassing the passage. I know the structures of the two passages are different, but would it be safe to say that in science passages that talk about a difficult problem or controversy with multiple competing viewpoints that new evidence that shed light onto these issues (difficulty classifying/ID'ing lichen or controversy over LHB) will be included in the MP?

Thank you!!

[ohthatpatrick]

Two things:

1. the correct answer to main point questions varies, from test to test and even within a given section.

What is always true is that it's the "best available" answer. Sometimes it's surprisingly broad. Sometimes it's surprisingly narrow. Sometimes it's surprisingly leaves something out that you would have figured it would include.



2. the best way to get yourself ready for main point is to know the PURPOSE of the passage. I have a short list of purposes from which I can almost always make one or more of them work:

- Clarify a Misconception
- Answer a Question
- Present a Debate
- Old vs. New
- Problem / Solution
- Illustrate General Claim with Specific Example
- Highlight the Importance / Awesomeness of someone or something

To me this passage would have gone under
Present a Debate / Answer a Question

Literally the first sentence says "A vigorous debate in astronomy centers on ... "

The debate is never expressed clearly, but it's essentially asking the question of "What the heck was going on during this LHB?"

The beginning of the 2nd paragraph shows us that we will be hearing about "Various theoretical approaches to account for the LHB".

Theory 1: some comet or asteroid orbiting the Sun blew up and hit the whole inner solar system with debris

Theory 2: LHB was just the tail end of billions of years of bombardment ... we only see the scars of this one more pronounced because it was the final scarring of the surface of the Moon

Theory 3: something blew up in the immediate vicinity of Earth / Moon and only really affected these three.


With a debate passage, if the author just presents the sides but doesn't lean towards one, then the main point will sound like "There is a vigorous debate".

But if the author leans towards one, the main point will be more focused on that one. The last paragraph has the typical "but RECENTLY" part found in science passages. Most science passages are about new research bringing us closer to answering an old question, or providing us with a new model that might replace or supplement the old model.

The last paragraph sides with Theory 1, so the main point answer also needs to indicate that within this debate, Theory 1 seems to be winning.

Hope this helps.