Self-study
Support Recently, photons and neutrinos emitted by a distant supernova, an explosion of a star, reached Earth at virtually the same time. ████ ███████ ████████ ██████████ █████ ████ ███████ ██ █ ████████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████ ████ █ ████ ██████ █████████████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ █████ ██████ ███ ███ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ █████ ███████ █████ ████ ████████ ███ ███████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the simultaneous arrival of the photons and neutrinos supports the claim that gravity is a property of space itself. Specifically, it is evidence that bodies exert gravitational pull by curving space.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that we can't expect neutrinos and photons to have reached Earth at the same time unless space was curved. In other words, if space were not curved, we would expect protons and neutrinos to arrive at different times.
10.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ █████ ████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ██████
a
Einstein predicted that ███████ ███ █████████ ███████ ██ ███ ███ █████████ █████ █████ █████ ███████████████
Just because Einstein predicted the premise doesn't mean that this finding supports his theory. We don't know that he made this prediction based on his theory, and just knowing whether he predicted it or not doesn't tell us whether this finding actually works as evidence for his theory.
b
If gravity is ███ █ ████████ ██ █████ ███████ ████ ███████ ███ █████████ ███████ ██████████████ ██ █ ███████ █████ ████ █████ █████ ██ █████████ ██████
This strengthens the argument. The contrapositive of this statement tells us that if photons and neutrinos from a distant event do reach Earth at the same time, as they did in this case, then gravity must be a property of space itself. This maps on exactly to the author's argument.
c
Photons and neutrinos ███████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████ ██ ████████████ ██ █████ ██ ██████████ █████ ████ ███████ ██ █ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ████ ████████
If true, this would weaken the author's argument. It would contradict the author's conclusion that Einstein’s claim is correct, since the premises tell us that protons and neutrinos were detectable from Earth.
d
Photons and neutrinos ████ ███ ████ █████ ██ █████████ ████ ███████ █████ ████ ███ ██████████
Irrelevant. The author's argument doesn't depend on whether or not there were other particles besides photons and neutrinos.
e
Prior to the ████████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ████ ███ ██████████ █████ ███ ██ █████████ ████████ ███ ██████████ █████ ████ ███████ ██ █ ████████ ██ █████ ███████
Irrelevant. Knowing whether there was other evidence for Einstein's claim before this or not doesn't help us determine whether this finding functions as evidence for that claim.