For many centuries it was believed that only classical Euclidean geometry could provide a correct way of mathematically representing the universe.
Statements
For a long time people thought only classical Euclidean geometry could correctly mathematically represent the universe.
Pivot (nevertheless)
Scientists now believe that non-Euclidean geometry is more useful for some areas of scientific theory.
A non-Euclidean representation underlies the cosmological theory that now most widely accepted as accurate.
Evaluate
We aim to find Overlapping Language in Inference paragraphs, and the both the 2nd and 3rd claims are about "non-Euclidean representations". The 3rd sentence refers to it with a pronoun, though, so it's subtle ("such a representation").
This pronoun callback means that we should really read the 3rd sentence as .
We get a big Pivot tension in the paragraph between the Old belief and New belief.
We used to think that only Euclidean could provide a correct way of representing the universe.
But now the model of the universe most widely accepted by scientists is a non-Euclidean representation.
Goal
When there's a big Pivot creating tension between the before and after, we expect the correct answer to safely reconcile those two.
If we read something like, , then an overreaction might be something like "Tony was wrong" or "Maria loves pasta" or "the only pasta Maria likes is rigatoni".
None of those are provable. Maybe Maria had to eat rigatoni as part of a business dinner, even though she hates pasta.
A safely worded version of reconciling those two would be more like (A) Either Tony is wrong about Maria or people are sometimes willing to eat things they hate.
So we should watch out for answers that go too far in the new direction and trash classic Euclidean as worthless or dumb.