Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Medium

PT149 S2 P2 Q11 Explanation

The Multiverse

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

TopicsAuthor's AttitudeScience

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

In a typical Hollywood action movie, the hero skirts death to complete a mission. Bad guys shoot, cars explode, objects fall from the sky, but all just miss. If any one of those things happened would be dead. Yet the hero survives.

In some respects, the story of our universe resembles an action movie. A slight change to any one of the laws of physics would likely have caused some disaster that would have disrupted the normal evolution of the universe and made life impossible. For example, if the strong nuclear force had been physics must be so finely tuned that the very existence of such a universe becomes improbable.

Some cosmologists have tried to reconcile the existence of our universe with the seeming improbability of its existence by hypothesizing that our universe is but one of many universes within a wider array called the multiverse. In almost all of those universes, the laws of physics might not allow the formation of a good chance to get the “right” set of laws at least once.

But just how exceptional is the set of physical laws governing our universe? The view that the laws of physics are finely tuned arises largely from the difficulty scientists have had that would be compatible with life.

The conventional way scientists explore whether a particular constant of physics is finely tuned is to tweak it while leaving all other constants unaltered. The scientists then “play the movie” of that universe—they do calculations, what-if scenarios, or computer simulations—to see what disasters occur. But there is no reason to tweak just compatible with the formation of complex structures and perhaps even some forms of intelligent life.

Fine tuning has been invoked by some cosmologists as indirect evidence for the multiverse. Do our findings therefore call the concept of the multiverse into question? I do not think this is necessarily the case for two reasons. First, certain models of the birth of the universe would lead us to expect be the source of solutions to certain other long-standing puzzles in cosmology.

What this question is testing

Author's Attitude

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
11.

The author’s attitude toward the multiverse hypothesis can best be described as

Answer choices

  1. Opposite1% picked this

    We were looking for "Plausible and potentially very useful". The author definitely didn't dismiss it.

  2. Too Negative6% picked this

    We were looking for "Plausible and potentially very useful". The author doesn't say anything skeptical. Being skeptical is different from being agnostic (where you have no opinion whether it's true or false). Skeptical means that you are leaning towards thinking it's false, which we have no support for.

  3. Correct77% picked this

    Why this is right

    We were looking for "Plausible and potentially very useful". This is not quite that, but it's positive. What does it mean to keep an open mind or to have an open mind? It means that you haven't yet made a decision and that you're still receptive to it. If you were touring a college with your parent and your parent was excited about you going to this school whereas you were looking grumpy and dismissive, your parent might say, "Can you keep an open mind?" That would mean, "Can you reserve judgment? Can you not write this off?" When we talk about being an open-minded person, it's a willingness to be exposed to new things / learn new things. i.e. "My grandma had never heard about people naming their pronouns at the bottom of an email, but she's very open-minded so now she's doing it." Our author is definitely open to the possibility that the multiverse theory could be true (certain models would even lead us to expect it!) and she's receptive to the possibility that it could be a helpful theory that would allow us to solve some puzzles.

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

  4. Too Strong: advocacy12% picked this

    To advocate for something is to try to persuade others to believe a certain thought. Is this author trying to get people to believe in the multiverse? No. If we get tunnel vision for the last two sentences, we might think, "She certainly seems to be persuading me to take the multiverse theory seriously." But we have to consider the wider context of this paragraph. She's trying to reassure us that she isn't trashing the multiverse theory. Let's say we need to hire a new developer for LSAT Lab and I say at the meeting that this applicant Lou has no experience designing apps for the iOS or Android. "Does my statement therefore call the hiring of Lou into question? I do not think this is necessarily the case for two reasons. First, certain things we might want to do with the website would lead us to badly want someone with Lou's Python experience. Secondly, Lou may be able to figure out how to solve the problem of slow page loading times." What am I doing there, advocating that we hire Lou? No, but I'm demonstrating that I'm still open to him getting the position.

  5. Too Strong4% picked this

    The author definitely says some positive things about the multiverse. We predicted "plausible / potentially useful". Much like (D), if we only looked at the two final sentences, we might feel decent saying that the author seems to have some hope / some enthusiasm for the idea that the multiverse may well prove to be the solution to some long-standing puzzles. But again the author is only presenting positivity because she's worried that the reader will think that she just axed the possibility of the multiverse. She's trying to reassure us, "No, no ... the multiverse theory is still alive. It's still viable. It could even be juicy." However, this is a noncommittal "let's wait and see ... depending on the model of the birth of the universe we may expect something like the multiverse. And who knows, it may well solve a riddle or two for us?" She isn't actively trying to position herself as a proponent of the theory.

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