Reading Comprehension

PT130 · S2 · P2 · Q12 Philip Emeagwali

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

  • 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

This passage was adapted from articles published in the 1990s.

Topic

Philip Emeagwali’s breakthroughs in computer design by modeling network systems after patterns found in nature.

Framework

Highlight Noteworthy

Main Point

Emeagwali achieved major advances in parallel computing by designing computer systems inspired by natural processes like tree branching and honeycombs, and he believes this nature-inspired approach will shape the future of technology. (Most Valuable Sentence: Appears at the end of the final paragraph—)

P1: Emeagwali’s Early Breakthrough—Parallel Computers Inspired by Nature

In the 1980s, Emeagwali pioneered the use of massively parallel computers that could solve tough problems like modeling oil flow, showing that using lots of computers working together (inspired by nature) was way faster and more effective than traditional supercomputers operating one step at a time.

P2: How Nature’s Structures Inspired an Efficient Solution

To handle extremely complicated calculations needed for oil flow modeling, Emeagwali connected over 65,000 computers via the Internet and used the idea of how trees branch out efficiently to guide how the network shared tasks—showing that copying nature’s branching patterns led to a breakthrough in how parallel computing could work.

P3: Applying Nature’s Patterns Further—Honeycomb Computers and the Future

In 1996, Emeagwali designed a new computer system (this time modeled after the hexagonal structure of bee honeycombs) that he claims could predict weather far into the future. He argues that future discoveries in technology will come from imitating nature’s efficient designs.

12.

Which one of the following, if true, would provide the most support for Emeagwali's prediction mentioned the second-to-last sentence of the passage?

  1. Correct

    Until recently, computer scientists have

    Why this is right

    This is probably not a very appealing answer on a first pass, but once we've seen all five, we might work our way back here and see its "best available" appeal. It seems to be the only answer that addresses both 1. Computer scientists 2. A difference between the past and the present/near future If, in the past, a computer scientist had wanted to use nature as inspiration to solve a technical problem, they probably wouldn't have gotten very far with that solution path, since it wasn't until recently that we had any decent awareness of the mathematical principles underlying nature. Emeagwali is a computer scientist who looked to the natural phenomenon of tree branching in order to solve a technical problem about oil flow, but he did so with "a network design based on the mathematical principle that underlies the branching structures of trees". There's no way to harness the insights of nature and then apply them to our manmade problems unless we actually grasp the insights of nature. So because this answer is saying, "computer scientists didn't have the ability to grasp the underlying math of nature (in order to potentially use it as inspiration) until recently ... so now that they finally understand the mathematical principles of nature, we will increasingly see solutions inspired by nature." This is sort of like strengthening the prediction that "genetic scientists will increasingly try to bio-engineer traits they want through genetic manipulation" by saying, "it wasn't until recently that they could precisely target and alter specific genes". Or strengthening the prediction that "Josie will increasingly get better at basketball" by saying, "it wasn't until recently that Josie had access to a basketball".

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

    83% picked this

  2. Some of the variables affecting

    Weakens, if anything

    This is super-duper weak ("some'), so it's very unattractive as a correct answer on Strengthen / Weaken (whether it's LR or RC). This seems to be talking about us not understanding parts of nature. How could that help us argue that scientists will increasing use nature as inspiration for solving technical problems? If we don't understand something fully, we'd be less likely to craft a clever solution from it.

    2% picked this

  3. Computer designs for the prediction

    Unrelated to Goal

    This is saying that our computer models are more successful at prediction what nature will do, if humans aren't involved in the thing we're predicting. We're looking for an answer that helps us say, "more and more, scientists will be using nature as inspiration for solving a complex technical problem". "Computer models that try to predict nature" has nothing to do with using nature as inspiration to solve a technical problem (like using the 3D spacing of a honeycomb to solve the technical problem of weather modeling).

    5% picked this

  4. Some of the mathematical principles

    Weak / No Impact

    This is super-duper weak ("some'), so it's very unattractive as a correct answer on Strengthen / Weaken (whether it's LR or RC). This is only talking about Emeagwali's models and designs. But we're trying to strengthen a prediction about other computer scientists increasingly looking to nature for inspiration. This doesn't seem to speak to other scientists at all.

    7% picked this

  5. Underlying the designs for many

    No Impact

    This is saying that many traditional technologies were designed without the designers being explicitly aware of the underlying mathematical principles. Okay. What does that have to do with predicting an increase in scientists looking to nature as inspiration to solve a technical problem?

    3% picked this

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