CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >   The passage given below is followed by four ... Start Learning for Free
The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.
Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.
  • a)
    Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.
  • b)
    Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.
  • c)
    The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.
  • d)
    The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful result
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choo...
The passage says that pure science intends to discover without any end-goal in mind. While engineers use these benefits for practical applications. The author says that the science behind these practical applications are often considered false by pure science since they are approximated or not applied as per ideal conditions. In any case, even though they are rejected, these approximated science theories find lot of practical applications in everyday life.
Option A is correct. By diluting science, these theories are put into practical benefits. Hence, option A is correct 
Option B is incorrect as no such implication can be drawn from the passage 
Option C is incorrect. Linear relationship indicates that, if a certain theory is rejected by pure science, it is bound to be rejected by applied science too. This is clearly not the case as engineers use rejected theories for practical benefits.
Option D speaks only about engineers and has no reference to sciences or the main point of the paragraph. The paragraph intends to compare the functionalities of scientists and engineers while option D is specific to engineers and does not encapsulate the essence of the paragraph.
Hence, by way of elimination Option A is the most suitable summary
Free Test
Community Answer
The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choo...
Explanation:

Understanding the essence of the given passage is crucial in selecting the correct summary. Let's break down the key points to explain why option 'A' is the most appropriate summary:

Physics vs. Engineering:
- Physics is a pure science focusing on understanding matter's behavior without concern for practical applications.
- Engineering is the applied science using physical theories for specific purposes like building structures or devices.

The relationship between Physics and Engineering:
- Engineers heavily rely on physicists' discoveries, but their knowledge differs from that of physicists.
- Engineers often use physical theories that may be considered false in pure physics but are still effective in real-world applications.

Incorporating real-world constraints:
- Engineering contributes to knowledge by incorporating real-world constraints and conditions that may not be accounted for in pure physics.
- The practicality and ease of working with slightly inaccurate theories often make them more useful in engineering applications.

Therefore, option 'A' accurately captures the essence of the passage by highlighting how engineering integrates real-world constraints and conditions to produce successful results while drawing heavily from pure science.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected.The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific "truth." But what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints.But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations-to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. This imagining process is so difficult that there is a division of labour in physics: there are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws, but do not experiment; and then there are experimental physicists who experiment, imagine, deduce, and guess.We said that the laws of nature are approximate: that we first find the "wrong" ones, and then we find the "right" ones. Now, how can an experiment be "wrong"? First, in a trivial way: the apparatus can be faulty and you did not notice. But these things are easily fixed and checked back and forth. So without snatching at such minor things, how can the results of an experiment be wrong? Only by being inaccurate. For example, the mass of an object never seems to change; a spinning top has the same weight as a still one. So a "law" was invented: mass is constant, independent of speed. That "law" is now found to be incorrect. Mass is found to increase with velocity, but appreciable increase requires velocities near that of light.A true law is: if an object moves with a speed of less than one hundred miles a second the mass is constant to within one part in a million. In some such approximate form this is a correct law. So in practice one might think that the new law makes no significant difference. Well, yes and no. For ordinary speeds we can certainly forget it and use the simple constant mass law as a good approximation. But for high speeds we are wrong, and the higher the speed, the more wrong we are.Finally, and  most  interesting,  philosophically  we  are completely  wrong  with  the approximate law. Our entire picture of the world has to be altered even though the mass changes only by a little bit. This is a very peculiar thing about the philosophy, or the ideas, behind the laws.Even a very small effect sometimes requires profound changes to our ideas.Consider the two statements from the passage:Statement I: The mass of an object never seems to change.Statement II: Mass is found to increase with velocity.Q. Which of the following options CANNOT be concluded from the above passage?( d)  Statement I reveals that experimental physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess are philosophically wrong.

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected.The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific "truth." But what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints.But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations-to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. This imagining process is so difficult that there is a division of labour in physics: there are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws, but do not experiment; and then there are experimental physicists who experiment, imagine, deduce, and guess.We said that the laws of nature are approximate: that we first find the "wrong" ones, and then we find the "right" ones. Now, how can an experiment be "wrong"? First, in a trivial way: the apparatus can be faulty and you did not notice. But these things are easily fixed and checked back and forth. So without snatching at such minor things, how can the results of an experiment be wrong? Only by being inaccurate. For example, the mass of an object never seems to change; a spinning top has the same weight as a still one. So a "law" was invented: mass is constant, independent of speed. That "law" is now found to be incorrect. Mass is found to increase with velocity, but appreciable increase requires velocities near that of light.A true law is: if an object moves with a speed of less than one hundred miles a second the mass is constant to within one part in a million. In some such approximate form this is a correct law. So in practice one might think that the new law makes no significant difference. Well, yes and no. For ordinary speeds we can certainly forget it and use the simple constant mass law as a good approximation. But for high speeds we are wrong, and the higher the speed, the more wrong we are.Finally, and  most  interesting,  philosophically  we  are completely  wrong  with  the approximate law. Our entire picture of the world has to be altered even though the mass changes only by a little bit. This is a very peculiar thing about the philosophy, or the ideas, behind the laws.Even a very small effect sometimes requires profound changes to our ideas.'Big Bang' is a popular theory related to the origin of the universe. It states that the universe was the outcome of a big bang that released enormous energy.Q. Which of the following is the MOST PROBABLE inference about the big bang theory?

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected.The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific "truth." But what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints.But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations-to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. This imagining process is so difficult that there is a division of labour in physics: there are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws, but do not experiment; and then there are experimental physicists who experiment, imagine, deduce, and guess.We said that the laws of nature are approximate: that we first find the "wrong" ones, and then we find the "right" ones. Now, how can an experiment be "wrong"? First, in a trivial way: the apparatus can be faulty and you did not notice. But these things are easily fixed and checked back and forth. So without snatching at such minor things, how can the results of an experiment be wrong? Only by being inaccurate. For example, the mass of an object never seems to change; a spinning top has the same weight as a still one. So a "law" was invented: mass is constant, independent of speed. That "law" is now found to be incorrect. Mass is found to increase with velocity, but appreciable increase requires velocities near that of light.A true law is: if an object moves with a speed of less than one hundred miles a second the mass is constant to within one part in a million. In some such approximate form this is a correct law. So in practice one might think that the new law makes no significant difference. Well, yes and no. For ordinary speeds we can certainly forget it and use the simple constant mass law as a good approximation. But for high speeds we are wrong, and the higher the speed, the more wrong we are.Finally, and  most  interesting,  philosophically  we  are completely  wrong  with  the approximate law. Our entire picture of the world has to be altered even though the mass changes only by a little bit. This is a very peculiar thing about the philosophy, or the ideas, behind the laws.Even a very small effect sometimes requires profound changes to our ideas.Q. Which of the following options is DEFINITELY NOT an approximation to the complete truth?

Top Courses for CAT

The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2025 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.Physics is a pure science that seeks to understand the behavior of matter without regard to whether it will afford any practical benefit.Engineering is the correlative applied science in which physical theories are put to some specific use, such as building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. Engineers obviously rely heavily on the discoveries of physicists, but an engineer's knowledge of the world is not the same as the physicist's knowledge. In fact, an engineer's know-how will often depend on physical theories that, from the point of view of pure physics, are false. There are some reasons for this. First, theories that are false in the purest and strictest sense are still sometimes very good approximations to the true ones, and often have the added virtue of being much easier to work with. Second, sometimes the true theories apply only under highly idealized conditions which can only be created under controlled experimental situations. The engineer finds that in the real world, theories rejected by physicists yield more accurate predictions than the ones that they accept.a) Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.b) Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor.c) The relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science, and never the other way round.d) The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful resultCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev