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. ███
Intro to Topic ·Scientific progress is not linear; crucial idea are sometimes overlooked
The physicists mentioned at the beginning of P2 produced calculations showing that “it should be possible to break atoms apart.” Meitner’s insight regarding neutron bombardment is described in the last paragraph: “the researchers had actually been splitting uranium atoms.” Meitner’s insight helps show that it’s possible to break atoms apart. This is probably why the physicists would like her insight — it confirms that what their own calculations showed is correct.
a
was dependent upon ███ ████████████ ████ ████ ███ ████████
There’s no evidence that Meitner’s own insight into neutron bombardment was based on the calculations of the physicists at the beginning of P2.
b
paved the way ███ ████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ██ ██████ ████ ██████████ ██████
There’s no evidence that Meitner’s work made theoretical physics more acceptable in other countries. We also don’t have any reason to think the physicists described at the beginning of P2 cared about making physics more acceptable abroad.
c
proved that the ██████ ██ █████ ████ █████████ ████████
There’s no evidence that Meitner’s work showed that nuclei of atoms were “generally” unstable. We also don’t 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 ████ ██████████ ████ █████ █████ ██ █████
Supported. We know the physicists produced calculations showing that “in principle it should be possible to break atoms apart.” Meitner’s insight regarding neutron bombardment of uranium confirmed that breaking atoms apart is possible.
e
came after years ██ █████████ ███ ████ ████ ███████████ █████████ ███████ ████ ███ ████
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 doesn’t make sense for (E) to be the reason the physicists would be pleased with Meitner’s 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
Other’s 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 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.