ChaseDream
标题: GWD-29-Q28, 请教大家,C or E? [打印本页]
作者: mendi 时间: 2007-6-2 15:43
标题: GWD-29-Q28, 请教大家,C or E?
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere. After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.
不知大小,但能推出,因为进入后显示了sulfur,frag不含sulfur,而底层大气含sulfur,因为如果frag穿透sulfur渗出,所以frag肯定大到可以穿过大气。
In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
- The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
- The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
- The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.
- The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
- The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.C
[此贴子已经被作者于2007-6-3 19:44:59编辑过]
作者: julianfl 时间: 2007-6-3 18:39
支持C
麻烦LZ下次发帖的时候,把题号发在标题上面,这样便于以后XDJM查询。
谢谢。
作者: mendi 时间: 2007-6-3 19:45
改正了,请阅:)
作者: julianfl 时间: 2007-6-4 22:35
呵呵,很感谢:)
作者: 妖还在 时间: 2007-6-13 09:44
我开始也选E
不明白
顶一下,同问
作者: s7s7 时间: 2007-6-13 10:43
http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardID=24&ID=252976&page=1
作者: scarlett8327 时间: 2009-7-19 16:24
不明白
作者: xiaoniuren 时间: 2009-7-20 00:43
DDDDDD
作者: xiaoniuren 时间: 2009-7-29 16:07
D
作者: yy179920478 时间: 2009-7-30 20:04
up
作者: 斯咏 时间: 2009-8-1 14:29
:p
作者: pwss 时间: 2009-8-1 23:37
作者: mars_cheung 时间: 2009-10-26 20:52
读通原文就没疑问了
原文是说 94 年彗木大碰撞,但观测结果 did not show how big those fragments were,后面主要是对这个问题的解答。作者的推理基于两点,一是碰撞之后从外面观测到之前没有的硫磺(BF 1),二是硫磺只存在于木星大气的下层;继而推断硫磺是由于彗星碎片穿透木星大气层而漏出来的(BF 2 );最后得出彗星碎片会大得足够没有在大气中被完全燃烧掉的结论。
BF 1 是现象,而不是作者要证明的事物,排除 A B
BF 2 是作者结合前面观测结果的推理
D 的前半句可以说对,不过 BF 2 明显不是主结论,因此也排除。
作者提出 BF1 是为主结论服务,而不是要解释 BF1,而且原文没有表示转折之类的词汇,因此不存在 E 所说的对现象的反驳。
BF1 BF2 都是作者推测彗星碎片大小的论据,因此选 C
作者: chasedreamho 时间: 2010-2-22 10:55
答案E缺乏对整体性的考虑,没有关注到两个BOLD face 的功能根本上是要证明碎片足够大到可以穿透大气
作者: chasedreamho 时间: 2010-2-22 10:56
题目要读信息多呀,感觉这种题放考场上还得错
作者: zhuying820 时间: 2010-5-5 15:20
读通原文就没疑问了原文是说 94 年彗木大碰撞,但观测结果 did not show how big those fragments were,后面主要是对这个问题的解答。作者的推理基于两点,一是碰撞之后从外面观测到之前没有的硫磺(BF 1),二是硫磺只存在于木星大气的下层;继而推断硫磺是由于彗星碎片穿透木星大气层而漏出来的(BF 2 );最后得出彗星碎片会大得足够没有在大气中被完全燃烧掉的结论。BF 1 是现象,而不是作者要证明的事物,排除 A BBF 2 是作者结合前面观测结果的推理D 的前半句可以说对,不过 BF 2 明显不是主结论,因此也排除。作者提出 BF1 是为主结论服务,而不是要解释 BF1,而且原文没有表示转折之类的词汇,因此不存在 E 所说的对现象的反驳。BF1 BF2 都是作者推测彗星碎片大小的论据,因此选 C -- by 会员 mars_cheung (2009/10/26 20:52:00)
灰常好,灰常好!!
你这头像也很帅~!!!!!
作者: zhuying820 时间: 2010-5-5 15:22
题目要读信息多呀,感觉这种题放考场上还得错
-- by 会员 chasedreamho (2010/2/22 10:56:34)
很佩服,很佩服,我也要一直考到700为止
作者: sjmdlyc 时间: 2010-5-15 09:00
看来是选C了,在众说纷纭中找个答案真难!
作者: chasedreamho 时间: 2010-8-4 10:50
加油,一定行的
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |