Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT113 S1 P2 Q13 Explanation

Marie Curie

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsMeaning in ContextScience

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Spurred by the discovery that a substance containing uranium emitted radiation, Marie Curie began studying radioactivity in 1897. She first tested gold and copper for radiation but found none. She then tested pitchblende, a mineral that was known to contain uranium, and discovered that it was more radioactive than uranium. Acting on radiating and nonradiating elements, she was unable to postulate a mechanism by which to explain radiation.

It is now known that radiation occurs when certain isotopes (atoms of the same element that differ slightly in their atomic structure) decay, and that emission rates are not constant but decrease very slowly with time. Some critics have recently faulted Curie for not reaching these conclusions herself, but it would have in a process that takes billions of years, are present in nature exclusively in radioactive form.

Furthermore, we must recall that in Curie’s time the nature of the atom itself was still being debated. Physicists believed that matter could not be divided indefinitely but instead would eventually be reduced to its indivisible components. Chemists, on the other hand, observing that chemical reactions took place as if matter was concerned with the question of whether or not such indivisible atoms actually existed.

As a physicist, Curie conjectured that radiating substances might lose mass in the form of atoms, but this idea is very different from the explanation eventually arrived at. It was not until the 1930s that advances in quantum mechanics overthrew the earlier understanding of the atom and showed that radiation occurs because recognize that it was Curie’s investigation of radiation that paved the way for the later breakthroughs.

What this question is testing

Meaning in Context

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
13.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the meaning of the word “mechanism” as used by the author in the last sentence

Answer choices

  1. Correct53% picked this

    the physical process that underlies a

    Why this is right

    We were looking for "the underlying property or catalyst that results in radiation". That seems to match pretty well with the physical process that underlies radiation. Scientists can explain the mechanism by which magnetism works, for example. They can point to the phenomenon of magnetism and then explain the mechanism by which to explain it, referencing the physical process of charged ions that underlies this phenomenon. But they're not sure why some elements are emitting radiation. They can point to it happening but they couldn't provide provide you with a physical explanation of how it occurs.

    Skill tested: Meaning in Context · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  2. Bad Match: experimental apparatus4% picked this

    the experimental apparatus in which a

    The usage of "mechanism" here is not referring to a machine or gadget, like a garlic press is a mechanism / apparatus that forces a clove of garlic through tiny holes to output minced garlic. And the usage isn't related to specific experiments or laboratories. This sentence is talking about radiation, as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the world, as a mysterious property that we have observed in some elements but have no causal story to explain.

  3. Bad Match: used by scientists7% picked this

    the procedure scientists use to bring about the occurrence of

    This last sentence isn't talking about how scientists bring abou radiation. Radiation occurs with or without scientists noticing that it does. Uranium is emanating radiation, independent of human study. Why is it emanating radiation? We don't know. What sort of mechanism / thing triggers it to happen? This answer could be semi-fixed by saying the procedure this universe uses to bring about the occurrence of a phenomenon

  4. Bad match: isotopes3% picked this

    the isotopes of an element needed to produce

    We were looking for "the underlying property or catalyst that results in radiation". I don't know where isotopes is coming from, but we weren't saying that Curie was "unable to postulate an isotope by which to explain radiation".

  5. Weird Match34% picked this

    the scientific theory describing a

    This is a confusing (and tempting) answer choice, because a scientific theory describing radiation would definitely postulate a mechanism by which to explain radiation.. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is a scientific theory that describes the phenomenon of gravity, by postulating the mechanism by which it occurs (objects move throughout a curved dimension of spacetime that is warped by objects of great mass; gravity is a straight line path through warped spacetime). Mendel's theory of genetics described hereditary traits, by postulating the mechanism by which they occur (traits are encoded in genes within an individual's DNA / offspring gets half its DNA from each parent / different genes "win out" in terms of which ones get expressed or repressed). In other words, before Curie could devise any scientific theory describing radiation, she would first need to postulate a mechanism by which radiation occurs (i.e. she needs to be able to describe the physical process that underlies radiation). At this stage in the passage (and in Curie's career), she's not about to propose a scientific theory. She's just futzing around with radiation and seeing that it's happening but having no clue why / how it's happening. Postulating a mechanism by which to explain it, in this context, shouldn't sound like some grandiose scientific theory she couldn't complete. It needs to sound more casual, like "she couldn't even begin to tell you what radiation was or how it was working". (E) sort of encompasses (A), where (A) would be happening either way, but (E) doesn't necessarily need to be happening.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free