Self-paced
Expert: A group of researchers claims to have shown that for an antenna to work equally well at all frequencies, it must be symmetrical in shape and have what is known as a fractal structure. ███ ███ ███ ███████ █████████ ██ █████ ████████████ █████ █████████ ████ ██ █████ █████████ ██ ████ █████ ██████ ██ ███████████ █████ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ███████████ █████ ███ ██████████ ██████ █████ █████ ██ ██████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Some researchers say that for an antenna to work equally well at all frequencies, it’s necessary that the antenna be symmetrical and have a fractal structure. The author concludes this claim is wrong. This is based on the fact that there is an antenna that meets those necessary conditions, but does not work equally well at all frequencies.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses sufficient and necessary conditions. The researchers did not say that having a symmetrical shape and fractal structure is sufficient for working equally well at all frequencies; they said it those features were necessary. So pointing out that there’s an antenna that has those features but does not work equally well does not show that the the researchers’ claim is false.
14.
The reasoning in the expert's ████████ ██ ██████ ███████ ███ ████████
a
fails to provide █ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ █████████
The argument doesn’t need to define “fractal.” The word simply takes on its ordinary dictionary definition.
b
contradicts itself by ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ██████████ ███████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ███ ████████
The author doesn’t rely on the claims of authorities. The author identifies an antenna made by researchers, but the premise isn’t based on what researchers claim.
c
concludes that a █████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ █████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ████ ██ ██ ████
The premise does not assert that there’s not enough evidence to show the researchers are correct. The premise points out an antenna that is supposed to be a counterexample to the researchers’ claim.
d
interprets an assertion ████ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ████ █████ ██████████ ███ ██████████
The researchers asserted that symmetry and fractal nature were necessary for an antenna to work equally well at all frequencies. But the author interpreted this as a claim those conditions were sufficient for working equally well.
e
takes for granted ████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ████████ █████████████ ██████ █████ ██ █████ ███ █████████
The author does not exclude the possibility of antennas working at exactly 250 megahertz. The evidence happens to involve an antenna that works better at below 250 than above, but that doesn’t imply the author think exactly 250 is impossible.