Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 13:45 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 13:45

Close

GRE Prep Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GRE score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 28620
Own Kudos [?]: 33099 [10]
Given Kudos: 25173
Send PM
Most Helpful Community Reply
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 30 Jan 2019
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 80 [30]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
General Discussion
Moderator
Moderator
Joined: 22 Oct 2018
Posts: 86
Own Kudos [?]: 138 [0]
Given Kudos: 26
Send PM
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 10 Jan 2018
Posts: 35
Own Kudos [?]: 18 [3]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
2
1
Bookmarks
Gladiator59 wrote:
4 mins 57 secs... all correct! Wohooo :cool: The kind of passage that I like...straightforward and well written with some information to learn at the end of it. :-)

Classical physics defines a vacuum as an absence of stuff. But quantum field theories define it in more complicated terms. In normal vacuum some particles are created and they disintegrate really fast (so much so that we cannot even observe them!) this is still vacuum but not as defined by classical phy. So now vacuum is anything without "real" particles.

Suddenly, the passage starts talking about the energy of vacuum and states we ought to assume it to have the lowest possible energy. Goes on to add when a normal particle is added to vacuum its energy rises and these fluctuations ( electron-positron created and then destroyed) however, A surprising result of some recent theoretical investigations says that sometimes when particle added - energy reduces! This is said to happen when vacuum is permeated by a strong electric field and in such cases, electron-positron are created but this time they do not self-destruct and hence are real.

Finally, passage talks about how this "theoretical" finding can possibly be tested. If vacuum was next to an atomic nucleus with twice the protons than currently found in nature and reveals that experiments are being carried out to conduct such an experiment.


Really weird question if you do not understand the main point - vacuum is being discussed with two aspects in mind - normal vacuum (with its fluctuations) and special vacuum decay by being next to nucleus and possible theory being confirmed by experiment
Which of the following titles best describes the passage as a whole?
(A) The Vacuum: Its Fluctuations and Decay Crystal clear choice among the given options
(B) The Vacuum: Its Creation and Instability No, the creation of vacuum is out of scope.
(C) The Vacuum: A State of Absence TRAP? only the first line could lead to this one but does not summarize the passage well
(D) Particles That Materialize in the Vacuum too detailed to be the title
(E) Classical Physics and the Vacuum TRAP - even though this is the start - we are talking about other things throughout the passage

Cleverly worded detail question
According to the passage, the assumption that the introduction of a real particle into a vacuum raises the total energy of that region of space has been cast into doubt by which of the following?
(A) Findings from laboratory experiments Nope, the finding is based on theory and we are trying to conduct experiments to verify it.
(B) Findings from observational field experiments Discard for same as above
(C) Accidental observations made during other experiments Again, no observations.
(D) Discovery of several erroneous propositions is accepted theories Again, no discoveries from erroneous propositions - not mentioned.
(E) Predictions based on theoretical' work Perfect - verbatim from the passage

Options on this one are tricky because they have two parts - charged vacuum and particles - we need to be clear that a charged vacuum "decays" and creates "real" particles
It can be inferred from the passage that scientists are currently making efforts to observe which of the following events?
(A) The decay of a vacuum in the presence of virtual particles Nope - decay is in the presence of a charge and results in real particles
(B) The decay of a vacuum next to a superheavy atomic nucleus Right - even though this has less info than the other options this is correct
(C) The creation of a superheavy atomic nucleus next to an intense electric field 180 opposite choice - we are not creating the atomic nucleus ( even if we are that is not the point, it is only a means to an end)
(D) The creation of a virtual electron and a virtual positron as a result of fluctuations of a vacuum similar to option one
(E) The creation of a charged vacuum in which only real electrons can be created in the vacuum's region of space MAJOR TRAP - a lot of words that we are looking for but again not the crux of what is happening in the experiment - we are doing the experiment for "decay of vacuum"

We are looking for the following structure: Theoretical finding -> possible in real-world -> requires some experiment to possibly confirm it
Physicists' recent investigations of the decay of the vacuum, as described in the passage, most closely resemble which of the following hypothetical events in other disciplines?
(A) On the basis of data gathered in a carefully controlled laboratory experiment, a chemist predicts and then demonstrates the physical properties of a newly synthesized polymer. Again , data gathered first is reverse of what we are trying to do.
(B) On the basis of manipulations of macroeconomic theory, an economist predicts that, contrary to accepted economic theory, inflation and unemployment will both decline under conditions of rapid economic growth. The first few words are a giveaway and the rest of the option confirms. Still, we need to look at other options and rule them out
(C) On the basis of a rereading of the texts of Jane Austen's novels, a literary critic suggests that, contrary to accepted literary interpretations, Austen's plots were actually metaphors for political events in early nineteenth-century England. Rereading of texts is not a theoretical finding - discard.
(D) On the basis of data gathered in carefully planned observations of several species of birds, a biologist proposes a modification in the accepted theory of interspecies competition. Data gathered first - discard fast :-)
(E) On the basis of a study of observations incidentally recorded in ethnographers' descriptions of non-Western societies, an anthropologist proposes a new theory of kinship relations. Discard fast for same reason as above.

finally a straightforward question from the passage
According to the passage, the author considers the reduction of energy in an empty region of space to which a real particle has been added to be

(A) a well-known process not at all. 180 opposite
(B) a frequent occurrence same as above
(C) a fleeting aberration fleeting word is TRAP - the real particles created are long lasting - abberation again is clumsy - it is surprising find.
(D) an unimportant event then why would we discuss it? Not mentioned so discard.
(E) an unexpected outcome Perfect - infact this is verbatim from the passage ( marked in purple above)

Easy-cheesy detail question :-)
According to the passage, virtual particles differ from real particles in which of the following ways?

I. Virtual particles have extremely short lifetimes. CORRECT
II. Virtual particles are created in an intense electric field. OPPOSITE
III. Virtual particles cannot be detected directly. CORRECT

(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) Ill only
(D) I and II only
(E) I and III only Tick.

Start your critical reasoning engine - we want to look out for anything that goes against the theory mentioned
The author's assertions concerning the conditions that lead to the decay of the vacuum would be most weakened if which of the following occurred?
(A) Scientists created an electric field next to a vacuum, but found that the electric field was not intense enough to create a charged vacuum. Not against the theory - discard
(B) Scientists assembled a superheavy atomic nucleus next to a vacuum, but found that no virtual particles were created in the vacuum's region of space. TRAP - we are not looking for virtual particles at all - but for real ones. Discard.
(C) Scientists assembled a superheavy atomic nucleus next to a vacuum, but found that they could not then detect any real particles in the vacuum's region of space. PERFECT - a needle in a haystack - need to stay focussed and look out for what we know about the theory and then negate it.
(D) Scientists introduced a virtual electron and a virtual positron into a vacuum's region of space, but found that the vacuum did not then fluctuate. Opposite of what makes up the experiment. Discard.
(E) Scientists introduced a real electron and a real positron into a vacuum's region of space, but found that the total energy of the space increased by the energy equivalent of the mass of the particles. Discard for same reason as above!

Phew! That was one long post. Hope the explanations are helpful. :-)


"A surprising result of some recent theoretical investigations is that this assumption is not invariably true. There are conditions under which the introduction of a real particle of finite mass into an empty region of space can reduce the total energy. " How it could be a PREDICTION when there is a result realised from some recent invenstigation? Question 2
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 25 Dec 2019
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 14 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
1
i think it's still considered a prediction because the investigations are based on theories and not on actual observations
avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2020
Posts: 90
Own Kudos [?]: 82 [2]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
2
This is one of those passages that has interesting enough content to absorb our brain, and makes it much easier to read. Sadly very few passages are of the fields that interest us and which make the reading all the more daunting.
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 28620
Own Kudos [?]: 33099 [0]
Given Kudos: 25173
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
Expert Reply
Bump further discussion
Manager
Manager
Joined: 22 Sep 2020
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 63 [0]
Given Kudos: 97
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
Gladiator59 wrote:
4 mins 57 secs... all correct! Wohooo :cool: The kind of passage that I like...straightforward and well written with some information to learn at the end of it. :-)

Classical physics defines a vacuum as an absence of stuff. But quantum field theories define it in more complicated terms. In normal vacuum some particles are created and they disintegrate really fast (so much so that we cannot even observe them!) this is still vacuum but not as defined by classical phy. So now vacuum is anything without "real" particles.

Suddenly, the passage starts talking about the energy of vacuum and states we ought to assume it to have the lowest possible energy. Goes on to add when a normal particle is added to vacuum its energy rises and these fluctuations ( electron-positron created and then destroyed) however, A surprising result of some recent theoretical investigations says that sometimes when particle added - energy reduces! This is said to happen when vacuum is permeated by a strong electric field and in such cases, electron-positron are created but this time they do not self-destruct and hence are real.

Finally, passage talks about how this "theoretical" finding can possibly be tested. If vacuum was next to an atomic nucleus with twice the protons than currently found in nature and reveals that experiments are being carried out to conduct such an experiment.


Really weird question if you do not understand the main point - vacuum is being discussed with two aspects in mind - normal vacuum (with its fluctuations) and special vacuum decay by being next to nucleus and possible theory being confirmed by experiment
Which of the following titles best describes the passage as a whole?
(A) The Vacuum: Its Fluctuations and Decay Crystal clear choice among the given options
(B) The Vacuum: Its Creation and Instability No, the creation of vacuum is out of scope.
(C) The Vacuum: A State of Absence TRAP? only the first line could lead to this one but does not summarize the passage well
(D) Particles That Materialize in the Vacuum too detailed to be the title
(E) Classical Physics and the Vacuum TRAP - even though this is the start - we are talking about other things throughout the passage

Cleverly worded detail question
According to the passage, the assumption that the introduction of a real particle into a vacuum raises the total energy of that region of space has been cast into doubt by which of the following?
(A) Findings from laboratory experiments Nope, the finding is based on theory and we are trying to conduct experiments to verify it.
(B) Findings from observational field experiments Discard for same as above
(C) Accidental observations made during other experiments Again, no observations.
(D) Discovery of several erroneous propositions is accepted theories Again, no discoveries from erroneous propositions - not mentioned.
(E) Predictions based on theoretical' work Perfect - verbatim from the passage

Options on this one are tricky because they have two parts - charged vacuum and particles - we need to be clear that a charged vacuum "decays" and creates "real" particles
It can be inferred from the passage that scientists are currently making efforts to observe which of the following events?
(A) The decay of a vacuum in the presence of virtual particles Nope - decay is in the presence of a charge and results in real particles
(B) The decay of a vacuum next to a superheavy atomic nucleus Right - even though this has less info than the other options this is correct
(C) The creation of a superheavy atomic nucleus next to an intense electric field 180 opposite choice - we are not creating the atomic nucleus ( even if we are that is not the point, it is only a means to an end)
(D) The creation of a virtual electron and a virtual positron as a result of fluctuations of a vacuum similar to option one
(E) The creation of a charged vacuum in which only real electrons can be created in the vacuum's region of space MAJOR TRAP - a lot of words that we are looking for but again not the crux of what is happening in the experiment - we are doing the experiment for "decay of vacuum"

We are looking for the following structure: Theoretical finding -> possible in real-world -> requires some experiment to possibly confirm it
Physicists' recent investigations of the decay of the vacuum, as described in the passage, most closely resemble which of the following hypothetical events in other disciplines?
(A) On the basis of data gathered in a carefully controlled laboratory experiment, a chemist predicts and then demonstrates the physical properties of a newly synthesized polymer. Again , data gathered first is reverse of what we are trying to do.
(B) On the basis of manipulations of macroeconomic theory, an economist predicts that, contrary to accepted economic theory, inflation and unemployment will both decline under conditions of rapid economic growth. The first few words are a giveaway and the rest of the option confirms. Still, we need to look at other options and rule them out
(C) On the basis of a rereading of the texts of Jane Austen's novels, a literary critic suggests that, contrary to accepted literary interpretations, Austen's plots were actually metaphors for political events in early nineteenth-century England. Rereading of texts is not a theoretical finding - discard.
(D) On the basis of data gathered in carefully planned observations of several species of birds, a biologist proposes a modification in the accepted theory of interspecies competition. Data gathered first - discard fast :-)
(E) On the basis of a study of observations incidentally recorded in ethnographers' descriptions of non-Western societies, an anthropologist proposes a new theory of kinship relations. Discard fast for same reason as above.

finally a straightforward question from the passage
According to the passage, the author considers the reduction of energy in an empty region of space to which a real particle has been added to be

(A) a well-known process not at all. 180 opposite
(B) a frequent occurrence same as above
(C) a fleeting aberration fleeting word is TRAP - the real particles created are long lasting - abberation again is clumsy - it is surprising find.
(D) an unimportant event then why would we discuss it? Not mentioned so discard.
(E) an unexpected outcome Perfect - infact this is verbatim from the passage ( marked in purple above)

Easy-cheesy detail question :-)
According to the passage, virtual particles differ from real particles in which of the following ways?

I. Virtual particles have extremely short lifetimes. CORRECT
II. Virtual particles are created in an intense electric field. OPPOSITE
III. Virtual particles cannot be detected directly. CORRECT

(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) Ill only
(D) I and II only
(E) I and III only Tick.

Start your critical reasoning engine - we want to look out for anything that goes against the theory mentioned
The author's assertions concerning the conditions that lead to the decay of the vacuum would be most weakened if which of the following occurred?
(A) Scientists created an electric field next to a vacuum, but found that the electric field was not intense enough to create a charged vacuum. Not against the theory - discard
(B) Scientists assembled a superheavy atomic nucleus next to a vacuum, but found that no virtual particles were created in the vacuum's region of space. TRAP - we are not looking for virtual particles at all - but for real ones. Discard.
(C) Scientists assembled a superheavy atomic nucleus next to a vacuum, but found that they could not then detect any real particles in the vacuum's region of space. PERFECT - a needle in a haystack - need to stay focussed and look out for what we know about the theory and then negate it.
(D) Scientists introduced a virtual electron and a virtual positron into a vacuum's region of space, but found that the vacuum did not then fluctuate. Opposite of what makes up the experiment. Discard.
(E) Scientists introduced a real electron and a real positron into a vacuum's region of space, but found that the total energy of the space increased by the energy equivalent of the mass of the particles. Discard for same reason as above!

Phew! That was one long post. Hope the explanations are helpful. :-)


Very well explained answer, but I have one confusion on the last question.
How do I infer that scientist are looking for real particles from this experiment?
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 28620
Own Kudos [?]: 33099 [0]
Given Kudos: 25173
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
Expert Reply
It is not an inference question, rather a weaken question.

all the answer choices are true but one - C - weaken the argument

See the explanation above Sir

regards
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 01 Jun 2022
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
22. According to the passage, virtual particles differ from real particles in which of the following ways?

I. Virtual particles have extremely short lifetimes.
II. Virtual particles are created in an intense electric field.
III. Virtual particles cannot be detected directly.

In this question, the passage does mention that Virtual particles have a fleeting existence but that doesn't mean that it has " extremely" short lifetimes then how it is correct. Also, isn't "extremely" an extreme word?
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 28620
Own Kudos [?]: 33099 [1]
Given Kudos: 25173
Send PM
Re: Classical physics defines the vacuum as a state of absence: [#permalink]
1
Expert Reply
Archit wrote:
22. According to the passage, virtual particles differ from real particles in which of the following ways?

I. Virtual particles have extremely short lifetimes.
II. Virtual particles are created in an intense electric field.
III. Virtual particles cannot be detected directly.

In this question, the passage does mention that Virtual particles have a fleeting existence but that doesn't mean that it has " extremely" short lifetimes then how it is correct. Also, isn't "extremely" an extreme word?


In this case extremely is first and adverb and second is in place of exceptionally or very very super short.

Per see it is NOT an extreme word

An example of an extreme word could be

I am tired >>> I am exhausted

It is cold >>>> It is freezing

I hope this helps
Prep Club for GRE Bot
[#permalink]
Moderators:
GRE Instructor
218 posts
GRE Instructor
1029 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne