this really took me a while and i was not doing well on previous questions for not reading thoroughly, so i wanted to take my time on this:
the old way says the stars that are far away are 1 billion years old... that is impossible. because i declare that they are further and brighter. but what does that have to do with the conclusion? we have to piece the lack of words we have together.
we can delete A,D,E. because that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. I was stuck on B and C.
B suggests that we are discussing the universe...um okay yes but we are not talking about the quantity of stars in it. Just their BRIGHTNESS and AGE
C- the brighter a star is, the younger it is. Yes because she cannot fathom for them to be 1 billion years old and that far away. She is standing her ground that they are so much brighter than the old opinion and that she disagrees that they can be 1 billion years old.
there is no way they can be older than 1 billion years old! there are no answer choices that suggest that she thinks they are OLDER and BRIGHTER. is kinda how i read it in my mind...i hope this helps those who are confused. it might sound dumb the way i explained, but i really have to dumb it down to understand these. especially the hard ones.
"So the new estimates of these stars' distances from Earth help resolve the earlier conflict between the ages of these stars and the age of the universe."
either the stars are younger than previously thought OR the universe is older than previously thought
we should expect the correct answer to relate the brightness of stars to the age of stars OR to somehow connect their brightness with the age of the universe
only B) and C) are attractive based on the above
C) is exactly what we were looking for
B) is actually not helpful! it works in the opposite direction. If anything, we need the universe to be older than we had thought, not younger.
Why answer C is correct has been poorly explained, and this video should be redone with a much more thorough explanation. I largely understand why the other 4 are incorrect, but I do not understand why C is correct.
#feedback There ABSOLUTELY must be a more clear way to explain the correct answer to this question. There must be a way to more clearly explain the wrong answers as well. If the answer to both of those is no, then at least raise the difficulty meter of the question so that we do not feel like idiots.
Bruh this is so dumb... I knew the brighter the star the younger it is and I chose it but I was like what does this have to do with the conclusion about the universe so I changed it to B ugh
Went back between C and D thirty times, settled on D, knew in the back of my head if I switched to C then D would be right. Stayed on D. C was right. Screamed.
"An impossible scenario" is huge here tbh. LSAT writers know very well that you're not supposed to use outside knowledge, so they added that in order to cover the basis and not expect you to make the assumption that the two are incompatible concepts.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
116 comments
When I heard the learn'd astronomer...
can someone explain to me, I am not understanding the relationship between the brightness and a star being young?
I found this much more easier to explain if you are just treating the question as an RRE question, and not whatever this video said.
this really took me a while and i was not doing well on previous questions for not reading thoroughly, so i wanted to take my time on this:
the old way says the stars that are far away are 1 billion years old... that is impossible. because i declare that they are further and brighter. but what does that have to do with the conclusion? we have to piece the lack of words we have together.
we can delete A,D,E. because that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. I was stuck on B and C.
B suggests that we are discussing the universe...um okay yes but we are not talking about the quantity of stars in it. Just their BRIGHTNESS and AGE
C- the brighter a star is, the younger it is. Yes because she cannot fathom for them to be 1 billion years old and that far away. She is standing her ground that they are so much brighter than the old opinion and that she disagrees that they can be 1 billion years old.
there is no way they can be older than 1 billion years old! there are no answer choices that suggest that she thinks they are OLDER and BRIGHTER. is kinda how i read it in my mind...i hope this helps those who are confused. it might sound dumb the way i explained, but i really have to dumb it down to understand these. especially the hard ones.
"So the new estimates of these stars' distances from Earth help resolve the earlier conflict between the ages of these stars and the age of the universe."
either the stars are younger than previously thought OR the universe is older than previously thought
we should expect the correct answer to relate the brightness of stars to the age of stars OR to somehow connect their brightness with the age of the universe
only B) and C) are attractive based on the above
C) is exactly what we were looking for
B) is actually not helpful! it works in the opposite direction. If anything, we need the universe to be older than we had thought, not younger.
lol. "(E) feels like it gave up on life."
only knew this because im an astronomy nerd
#feedback
Why answer C is correct has been poorly explained, and this video should be redone with a much more thorough explanation. I largely understand why the other 4 are incorrect, but I do not understand why C is correct.
#feedback There ABSOLUTELY must be a more clear way to explain the correct answer to this question. There must be a way to more clearly explain the wrong answers as well. If the answer to both of those is no, then at least raise the difficulty meter of the question so that we do not feel like idiots.
Bruh this is so dumb... I knew the brighter the star the younger it is and I chose it but I was like what does this have to do with the conclusion about the universe so I changed it to B ugh
What the no prior knowledge my ass
diabolically worded question.
YUHHHH BRING ME BACK TO RRE! I HATE NA
"Dont bring outside knowledge into the LSAT"
"Anyway you really need to consider both the intrinsic AND apparent brightness of stars for this one"
GIRL PLEASE! WHAT THE HALLE BERRYYYYYYY
I think it's time to log off 7sage for the day.
JY we know you had to google intrinsic brightness too, don't pretend
I understand why D is wrong (the answer I chose) but I'm still not following the reasoning behind why C is correct.
ima crash out
Went back between C and D thirty times, settled on D, knew in the back of my head if I switched to C then D would be right. Stayed on D. C was right. Screamed.
Chose D initially, but got C in blind review. Taking this as a win for today.
I think this might be the first answer I got wrong with a low priority, and I just want to say phewwwww
yep, that's enough for the day
"An impossible scenario" is huge here tbh. LSAT writers know very well that you're not supposed to use outside knowledge, so they added that in order to cover the basis and not expect you to make the assumption that the two are incompatible concepts.
this question broke my brain lol
this is difficult