Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT152 S3 P4 Q25 ExplanationCarroll and Chen's Multiverse

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

TopicsPrimary PurposeScience

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

Primary Purpose

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
25.

The primary purpose of the passage

Answer choices, explained

  1. Out of Scope: draw novel consequences4% picked this

    draw novel consequences from an established

    None of this answer seems to match up. The passage is not based on any established principle, nor does the author try to draw any novel ideas. The author is presenting some novel ideas from Carroll and Chen.

  2. Too Strong: challenge view19% picked this

    challenge a dominant point of

    Carroll and Chen might be challenging a common notion within physics, but the author isn't writing this passage to challenge any view. The author is presenting and sympathetically considering these ideas being offered by Carroll and Chen. But the author definitely didn't sit down to write a passage that challenges a dominant view.

  3. Out of Scope: history / dispute3% picked this

    chronicle the history of a

    This passage takes place in the present, with emerging ideas in physics. There's no "dispute" whose history is being chronicled.

  4. Too Opinionated: adjudicate6% picked this

    adjudicate between two

    Since our author is pretty neutral throughout, we definitely couldn't say that she wrote this essay in order to "judge which theory is correct".

  5. Correct68% picked this

    give the rationale for a

    Why this is right

    Not super lovable, but our best available. Since the author is mainly presenting Carroll and Chen's ideas, it's nice to see the neutral clause, "Give the rationale for a theory". That's not saying the author endorses the theory or challenges it. She just presents the ideas behind it. Since this passage feels neutral / presentational, this answer choice best matches that purpose.

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

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