GWD-10-15 困扰阿

GWD-10-Q15

Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?

Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space. This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since     .

A.      many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years

B.       for satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive

C.      there are no known previous instances of satellites’ having been exploded on purpose

D.      the only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth

E.       a greatly increased number of small particles in Earth’s orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible

 正确答案是：E

但我觉得无关阿，题目中说的是炸掉large satellites,而E说的是small particles

请教大家，先谢了！

自己顶一下，拜托大家了！

看来靠别人不如靠自己啊，我明白了。

large satellites 爆炸之后就变成了a greatly increased number of small particles。 E削弱

MM这里说的E是他因削弱。

原文说的是把那些失效的卫星抛弃到太空中去

结论：可以是望远镜观察器免受干扰。

weaken。因为望远镜观察器的干扰是因为地球轨道中的离子云造成的，所以即使你把失效的卫星丢了，还是没有办法是望远镜能免受干扰。。

  我认为这里并不是他因削弱，因为题目中已经阐述了large satellite 的影响，而如果把large satellite 炸掉之后就成为了small particles, 会造成E所说的影响，所以这里的意思是，炸不炸都会有影响。所以削弱了

这个题是解释题 e解释了为什么爆炸不行。因为爆炸会产生number of small particles，阻碍望远镜观察 

C选项 不能解释  因为以前没有试过这种方法就否定这种方法 不能成为原因