Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT152 S3 P4 Q20 Explanation

Carroll and Chen's Multiverse

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

TopicsMain PointScience

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

Physicists posit that at first our universe was infinitesimally small and infinitely hot and dense. It then underwent a period of extremely rapid, massive inflation (the Big continued to expand and cool.

According to physicists Sean Carroll and Jennifer Chen, the Big Bang was not a unique event; events like it happen periodically over an incredibly vast time scale. This is based on the suggestion of some physicists that the Big Bang was the beginning of our universe as we know it, but not which we can never see because it is beyond our “cosmic bubble.”

Carroll and Chen were initially interested in why time flows in only one direction. In physics the flow of time is captured by the second law of thermodynamics, which implies that entropy—a measure of total disorder—naturally increases with time. Entropy increases because there are more ways for a system to be disordered room are continually moved randomly, it is most likely that the room will get increasingly disordered.

While the Big Bang process and what followed obey the second law of thermodynamics, it is a mystery why there should have been a small, hot, and dense universe to begin with. Such a low entropy universe is an extremely unlikely configuration, not what scientists would expect from a randomly occurring initial cold, empty space—not an obviously favorable starting point for the onset of inflation.

Recent research has shown that even empty space has faint traces of energy that fluctuate on the subatomic scale. Physicists Jaume Garriga and Alexander Vilenkin have suggested that these fluctuations can generate their own big bangs in tiny areas widely separated in time and space. to be such fluctuations in a high entropy multiverse.

On this view, while the initial state that produced our universe would appear to be, taken by itself, a highly improbable one, in the vastness of the multiverse the creation of our universe is likely not even a unique event.

What this question is testing

Main Point

Your task

Capture the passage's overall primary point — the claim everything else supports.

Common trap

Answers that are true but too narrow (a single paragraph) or too broad (beyond the passage's scope).

Winning move

Summarize the whole passage in one sentence first, then match it to a choice.

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

The question
20.

Which one of the following most accurately states the main idea of

Answer choices

  1. Correct53% picked this

    Carroll and Chen theorize that our universe is the result of an energy fluctuation in

    Why this is right

    Since the Problem/Question was, "Given that high entropy is what we expect to be the default condition of the universe, why does it seem like the Big Bang came from some small/hot/dense low entropy precursor". The researchers / the passage answer this question by saying, "Well it low entropy locally, in the subatomic pocket of space where the fluctuation occurred, but this was just a common blip in a high entropy multiverse".

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

  2. Too Narrow Contradicted2% picked this

    According to Carroll and Chen, entropy increases because there are more ways for a system to be disordered than

    Too Narrow Contradicted: according to C&C The 2nd law of Thermodynamics is only brought up to set the stage for a conversation about entropy ("C&C were initially interested in time/entropy), to segue into the central mystery of the passage: how could our universe start from something low entropy if high entropy is the default condition of the universe? The 3rd paragraph is saying that "all of physics" shares these ideas about entropy / thermodynamics.

  3. Contradicted12% picked this

    Carroll and Chen challenge the prevailing view of physicists that our universe underwent a period of

    C&C aren't saying that the universe didn't undergo an inflationary stage. They're still upholding the possibility of inflation. They are just trying to resolve the question of why the pre-inflationary universe seems low entropy. They aren't changing the inflation part of the Big Bang story; they're just saying, "inflation (the Big Bang / aftermath) didn't come from some rare, unlikely low entropy universe, rather the Big Bang started in a low entropy subatomic patch of empty space, which was inside of a larger high entropy multiverse."

  4. Too Narrow16% picked this

    According to Carroll and Chen, a small, hot, and dense configuration is unlikely as a random initial

    They would agree with this, but this is far too narrow. Their one sentence takeaway for us isn't, "Small / hot / dense is unlikely to be the random initial condition for a universe". Their one sentence takeaway is "the Big Bang was probably just a relatively normal fluctuation that occurred in a tiny subatomic area of space within a high entropy multiverse".

  5. Too Narrow17% picked this

    Carroll and Chen posit that our universe is one of many universes in

    This is a pretty compelling second option. C&C would agree that our universe is one of potentially many in a big ol' multiverse. But this answer is doing a poor job of addressing the central Problem/Question and C&C's innovative Solution/Answer. The problem/question centered around the entropy paradox, so for this answer to not address the initial condition entropy problem is dodging the central issue of the passage.

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