Conflicting Viewpoints and Hypotheses

182 soru

Soru 181Soru

Two scientists debate the formation of the Grand Canyon.

Scientist 1
The Grand Canyon was carved slowly over approximately 6 million years. The Colorado River gradually eroded the uplifting Colorado Plateau. The erosion rate remained relatively constant, averaging about 0.15 mm/yr0.15\text{ mm/yr}. This slow process allowed the river to gradually cut through the rising rock strata, depositing fine, well-sorted sediments downstream at a steady rate.

Scientist 2
The Grand Canyon was formed rapidly, likely within a few weeks, by a catastrophic outburst flood. Approximately 5.5 million years ago, a massive prehistoric lake located on the Colorado Plateau breached its natural barrier. The sudden release of water created a massive, high-velocity flow that carved the canyon. This flood would have deposited a thick layer of unsorted gravel and large boulders downstream.

Based on the presented viewpoints, the discovery of a downstream sediment layer containing large, poorly sorted boulders dated to 5.5 million years ago is consistent with the predictions of Scientist 1.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze Scientist 1's predictions regarding downstream sediments.
Scientist 1 predicts that slow erosion deposits fine, well-sorted sediments downstream at a steady rate.
To establish the expected sedimentary evidence for the gradual incision hypothesis.
2
Analyze Scientist 2's predictions regarding downstream sediments.
Scientist 2 predicts that a catastrophic outburst flood would deposit a thick layer of unsorted gravel and large boulders downstream.
To establish the expected sedimentary evidence for the breached lake hypothesis.
3
Compare the new observation of large, poorly sorted boulders dated to 5.5 million years ago with both predictions.
The observation of large, poorly sorted boulders aligns with the high-velocity transport predicted by Scientist 2 and contradicts the slow, steady sedimentation predicted by Scientist 1. Therefore, the statement is false.
To determine the truth value of the proposed statement based on the viewpoints.

Anahtar Kavram

Aligning physical geological evidence with predictions derived from competing scientific hypotheses.
Soru 182Soru

### Hawaiian-Emperor Seamount Chain

The Hawaiian-Emperor seamount chain is a trail of volcanoes on the Pacific Plate. Two hypotheses discuss the origin of these volcanoes.

Hypothesis 1 (Stationary Plume)
A stationary mantle plume under the Pacific Plate supplies magma. As the plate moves northwestward at a constant rate, new volcanoes form directly over the plume. Volcanoes that have moved away from the plume become inactive. This hypothesis predicts that the age of the seamounts increases linearly with distance from the active hotspot (0 km0\text{ km} at Hawaii).

Hypothesis 2 (Lithospheric Stress)
Volcanism occurs along pre-existing fractures in the plate. The fractures open due to tectonic stress changes at plate boundaries. Volcanic activity can occur simultaneously along a fracture zone, and the age of volcanic centers is determined by when stress reactivation occurred, resulting in clustered or non-linear ages along the chain.

Researchers measured the age and distance from Hawaii of four seamounts in the chain, shown in the table below:

SeamountDistance from Hawaii (km)Measured Age (million years)
Seamount W5005.2
Seamount X1,0009.8
Seamount Y1,50015.1
Seamount Z2,00019.9

Which hypothesis is supported by this data, and why?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Hypothesis 1, because the age of the seamounts increases linearly with distance from Hawaii.

Cevap

Hypothesis 1, because the age of the seamounts increases linearly with distance from Hawaii.
The correct answer is supported because the data in the table shows that as the distance from Hawaii increases (from 500 km500\text{ km} to 2,000 km2,000\text{ km}), the measured age of the seamounts increases steadily and linearly (from 5.25.2 to 19.9 million years19.9\text{ million years}). This direct linear relationship directly aligns with the prediction of Hypothesis 1, which states that volcanic age increases linearly with distance from the active hotspot.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the predictions made by each hypothesis regarding seamount ages and distances.
Hypothesis 1 predicts a linear increase in age with distance from the active hotspot. Hypothesis 2 predicts non-linear, clustered, or independent ages along the chain.
This establishes the predicted patterns for each viewpoint to compare with the data.
2
Examine the data table to identify the relationship between the distance from Hawaii and the measured age of the seamounts.
As the distance increases from 500 km500\text{ km} to 2,000 km2,000\text{ km}, the age increases from 5.2 million years5.2\text{ million years} to 19.9 million years19.9\text{ million years}. This is a steady, linear increase.
This extracts the empirical trend shown by the measurements.
3
Align the identified data trend with the correct hypothesis.
The linear increase observed in the data matches the linear prediction of Hypothesis 1 and contradicts the non-linear prediction of Hypothesis 2.
This determines which viewpoint is supported by the data.

Anahtar Kavram

Aligning Data and Predictions with Viewpoints
Tahmini Süre:1m 0s
ÖncekiSayfa 10 / 10
Conflicting Viewpoints and Hypotheses Alıştırma Soruları — ACT — Sayfa 10 | Examkin