This is anti-supported. Because fluid flows away from areas of higher pressure, the glass would thin out in the part under the heavy object and become thicker in the non-pressured areas. Thus, it would not remain uniformly thick.

This is anti-supported. The stimulus directly states that fluids flow away from areas of higher pressure. Since glass is a fluid, it would therefore flow away from the point of greatest pressure, not towards.

This is anti-supported. The stimulus explains that glass, as a fluid, does not compress; instead, it flows. Because fluids do not compress, glass would not compress under pressure.

This is not supported. The stimulus specifically sets out the condition that the glass would not crack, so it could only divide into two pieces if the glass flowed fully out from underneath the object. And we just don’t have a good sense of whether or not that would happen.

This is strongly supported. We know that glass flows away from pressure. This means it would slowly move away from the pressure created by the object and towards non-pressured areas, causing the sheet to be thinner where there’s pressure and thicker where there isn’t.