PrepTest 136, Section 1, Question 26
Advances in scientific understanding often do not build(475 more words not shown)
Given the information in the(30 more words not shown)
- AThe physicists conducting(14 more words not shown)
- BThe physicists conducting(20 more words not shown)
- CThe physicists conducting(24 more words not shown)
- DMore physicists concentrated(10 more words not shown)
- EPhysicists conducted experiments(10 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
What held recognition back? The products were hard to analyze, but the author calls the expectation about their composition the more significant obstacle. Researchers expected elements close to uranium, so evidence pointing elsewhere was difficult to recognize and explain. Removing that expectation would address the problem directly.
What we’re looking for
Compare that with simply producing more results. More data might help, but these scientists already had relevant evidence. If the same expectation remained, additional results could run into the same interpretive barrier.
Working the answers
- A
Using identical techniques doesn't remove the misleading expectation or establish that the products would be easier to identify. We aren't told that differences in technique caused the delay.
- BCorrect
Without a fixed expectation about the by-products' composition, researchers would have been more open to what the results indicated. This removes the obstacle the author identifies as especially important. It doesn't require assuming that nobody had attempted an analysis before.
- C
Being unaware that splitting atoms was theoretically possible wouldn't supply the missing connection. The account gives no reason that less knowledge of that possibility would speed recognition.
- D
More researchers obtaining results could sound helpful. But that supplies more experimental activity without changing how the results are understood. B addresses the stated bottleneck; D could leave it intact.
- E
We aren't given a comparison showing that another substance would make the discovery easier. Nor do we need to assume uranium was the easiest substance to split. This proposed change simply lacks the direct support B has.
More Application questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Application questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.