Advances in scientific understanding often do not build directly or smoothly in response to the data that are amassed, and in retrospect, after a major revision of theory, it may seem strange that a crucial hypothesis was long overlooked. βββ
Intro to Topic Β·Scientific progress is not linear; crucial idea are sometimes overlooked
The physicists mentioned at the beginning of P2 produced calculations showing that βit should be possible to break atoms apart.β Meitnerβs insight regarding neutron bombardment is described in the last paragraph: βthe researchers had actually been splitting uranium atoms.β Meitnerβs insight helps show that itβs possible to break atoms apart. This is probably why the physicists would like her insight β it confirms that what their own calculations showed is correct.
a
was dependent upon βββ ββββββββββββ ββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ
Thereβs no evidence that Meitnerβs own insight into neutron bombardment was based on the calculations of the physicists at the beginning of P2.
b
paved the way βββ ββββ ββ βββββββββββ βββββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ ββββββββββ ββββββ
Thereβs no evidence that Meitnerβs work made theoretical physics more acceptable in other countries. We also donβt have any reason to think the physicists described at the beginning of P2 cared about making physics more acceptable abroad.
c
proved that the ββββββ ββ βββββ ββββ βββββββββ ββββββββ
Thereβs no evidence that Meitnerβs work showed that nuclei of atoms were βgenerallyβ unstable. We also donβt have any reason to think the physicists described at the beginning of P2 cared about showing that atoms were generally unstable.
d
confirmed their earlier ββββ ββββββββββ ββββ βββββ βββββ ββ βββββ
Supported. We know the physicists produced calculations showing that βin principle it should be possible to break atoms apart.β Meitnerβs insight regarding neutron bombardment of uranium confirmed that breaking atoms apart is possible.
e
came after years ββ βββββββββ βββ ββββ ββββ βββββββββββ βββββββββ βββββββ ββββ βββ ββββ
We have no reason to think the physicists described at the beginning of P2 would care about how many years Meitner spent analyzing data. So it doesnβt make sense for (E) to be the reason the physicists would be pleased with Meitnerβs insight.
Difficulty
86% of people who answer get this correct
This is a moderately difficult question.
It is somewhat easier than other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%140
148
75%157
Analysis
Implied
Otherβs perspective
Phenomenon-hypothesis
Science
Single position
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
6%
159
b
3%
155
c
3%
157
d
86%
165
e
2%
158
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
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 belowβit only takes a minuteβand 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 belowβit only takes a minuteβand then youβre 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 belowβit only takes a minuteβand then youβre 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.