Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earthandrsquo;s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

ACT Exam > ACT Questions > Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that dril...

Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.

Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.

If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?

a)
Cannot be determined from the given information
b)
Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is short
c)
Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loaction
d)
Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locations

Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Verified Answer

Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be pe...

This coastal location removes the issue of water pressure, while keeping the short drilling distance that would be the benefit of drilling underwater. Both scientists would want to drill at this location because it contains the benefits that both of the scientists prefer.

View all questions of this test

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for ACT exam

Similar ACT Doubts

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageNear the end of the 19th century, British engineer Osborne Reynolds ran a set of experiments to observe and predict the transition between laminar (steady) and turbulent ﬂow of a liquid through a pipe. In Reynolds’ experiments, dye was forced through a liquid to show visually when the ﬂow changed from laminar to turbulent. Laminar ﬂow is common only in cases in which the ﬂow channel is relatively small, the ﬂuid is moving slowly, and its viscosity (the degree to which a ﬂuid resists ﬂow under an applied forc e) is relatively high. In turbulent ﬂow, the speed of the ﬂuid at any given point is continuously undergoing changes in both magnitude and direction. Reynolds demonstrated that the transition from laminar to turbulent ﬂow in a pipe depends upon the value of a mathematical quantity equal to the velocity of ﬂow (V ) times the diameter of the tube (D) times the mass density (ρ) of the ﬂuid divided by its absolute viscosity (µ). The “Reynolds number,” as it is called, is determined by the following equation:Several students designed similar experiments to observe ﬂow rates of different liquids. To conduct the experiments, the students were given the following apparatus: Liquid supply tank with clear test section tube and ‘bell mouth’ entrance 1 Rotameter to measure the velocity of ﬂow (ﬂow rate) Tap water • Motor oil 4, 10-ft long smooth pipes of various diameters: 0.25-inch, 0.50-inch, 0.75-inch, 1.0-inchFigure 1 illustrates an approximation of the set-up of each experiment.Figure 2 shows approximate viscosities of the water and motor oils used in the experiments.Experiment 1In Experiment 1, students began with a pipe of diameter 0.25 inches. The pipe was set first at a 15° angle and tap water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe. The velocity of flow (V) was measured. The pipe was then set at a 30° angle, a 45° angle, and a 60° angle, water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe, and the velocity of flow was measured. The process was then repeated for each diameter of pipe using the same amount of water each time. All data were recorded in Table 1. Temperature of the water was held constant at 20°C.Experiment 2In the second experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil A and the processes were repeated. The results are given in Table 2.Experiment 3In a third experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil B and the processes were repeated.Q.According to the passage, laminar ﬂow was most likely to be observed under which of the following conditions?

View answer

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageNear the end of the 19th century, British engineer Osborne Reynolds ran a set of experiments to observe and predict the transition between laminar (steady) and turbulent ﬂow of a liquid through a pipe. In Reynolds’ experiments, dye was forced through a liquid to show visually when the ﬂow changed from laminar to turbulent. Laminar ﬂow is common only in cases in which the ﬂow channel is relatively small, the ﬂuid is moving slowly, and its viscosity (the degree to which a ﬂuid resists ﬂow under an applied forc e) is relatively high. In turbulent ﬂow, the speed of the ﬂuid at any given point is continuously undergoing changes in both magnitude and direction. Reynolds demonstrated that the transition from laminar to turbulent ﬂow in a pipe depends upon the value of a mathematical quantity equal to the velocity of ﬂow (V ) times the diameter of the tube (D) times the mass density (ρ) of the ﬂuid divided by its absolute viscosity (µ). The “Reynolds number,” as it is called, is determined by the following equation:Several students designed similar experiments to observe ﬂow rates of different liquids. To conduct the experiments, the students were given the following apparatus: Liquid supply tank with clear test section tube and ‘bell mouth’ entrance 1 Rotameter to measure the velocity of ﬂow (ﬂow rate) Tap water • Motor oil 4, 10-ft long smooth pipes of various diameters: 0.25-inch, 0.50-inch, 0.75-inch, 1.0-inchFigure 1 illustrates an approximation of the set-up of each experiment.Figure 2 shows approximate viscosities of the water and motor oils used in the experiments.Experiment 1In Experiment 1, students began with a pipe of diameter 0.25 inches. The pipe was set first at a 15° angle and tap water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe. The velocity of flow (V) was measured. The pipe was then set at a 30° angle, a 45° angle, and a 60° angle, water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe, and the velocity of flow was measured. The process was then repeated for each diameter of pipe using the same amount of water each time. All data were recorded in Table 1. Temperature of the water was held constant at 20°C.Experiment 2In the second experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil A and the processes were repeated. The results are given in Table 2.Experiment 3In a third experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil B and the processes were repeated.Q.Information in the passage and the results of the experiments indicate which of the following? Compared to tap water, Motor Oil A

View answer

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageNear the end of the 19th century, British engineer Osborne Reynolds ran a set of experiments to observe and predict the transition between laminar (steady) and turbulent ﬂow of a liquid through a pipe. In Reynolds’ experiments, dye was forced through a liquid to show visually when the ﬂow changed from laminar to turbulent. Laminar ﬂow is common only in cases in which the ﬂow channel is relatively small, the ﬂuid is moving slowly, and its viscosity (the degree to which a ﬂuid resists ﬂow under an applied forc e) is relatively high. In turbulent ﬂow, the speed of the ﬂuid at any given point is continuously undergoing changes in both magnitude and direction. Reynolds demonstrated that the transition from laminar to turbulent ﬂow in a pipe depends upon the value of a mathematical quantity equal to the velocity of ﬂow (V ) times the diameter of the tube (D) times the mass density (ρ) of the ﬂuid divided by its absolute viscosity (µ). The “Reynolds number,” as it is called, is determined by the following equation:Several students designed similar experiments to observe ﬂow rates of different liquids. To conduct the experiments, the students were given the following apparatus: Liquid supply tank with clear test section tube and ‘bell mouth’ entrance 1 Rotameter to measure the velocity of ﬂow (ﬂow rate) Tap water • Motor oil 4, 10-ft long smooth pipes of various diameters: 0.25-inch, 0.50-inch, 0.75-inch, 1.0-inchFigure 1 illustrates an approximation of the set-up of each experiment.Figure 2 shows approximate viscosities of the water and motor oils used in the experiments.Experiment 1In Experiment 1, students began with a pipe of diameter 0.25 inches. The pipe was set first at a 15° angle and tap water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe. The velocity of flow (V) was measured. The pipe was then set at a 30° angle, a 45° angle, and a 60° angle, water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe, and the velocity of flow was measured. The process was then repeated for each diameter of pipe using the same amount of water each time. All data were recorded in Table 1. Temperature of the water was held constant at 20°C.Experiment 2In the second experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil A and the processes were repeated. The results are given in Table 2.Experiment 3In a third experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil B and the processes were repeated.Q. In Experiment 1, at a 30° angle, flow rate would most likely have been approximately 6.0 ft/s for which new pipe diameter?

View answer

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageScientists have observed rapid eutrophication of a local lake, at a rate much higher than that of other lakes in the area.Eutrophication is the aging of a lake, resulting in increased levels of plant life and accumulated sediments, brought on by a build-up of nutrients such as nitrates and phosphates.Rapid eutrophication is harmful, as it leads to the dying off of cold water ﬁsh such as trout. Researchers performed the following experiments to determine the possible source of the increased nitrates and phosphates.Experiment 1Scientists suspected that one source of nutrients was a feeder stream which intercepts run-off from farmland where pesticides and animal waste are found. Water samples were obtained over several days from that stream (Feeder

View answer

Directions:Read the passages and choose the best answer to each question.PassageNear the end of the 19th century, British engineer Osborne Reynolds ran a set of experiments to observe and predict the transition between laminar (steady) and turbulent ﬂow of a liquid through a pipe. In Reynolds’ experiments, dye was forced through a liquid to show visually when the ﬂow changed from laminar to turbulent. Laminar ﬂow is common only in cases in which the ﬂow channel is relatively small, the ﬂuid is moving slowly, and its viscosity (the degree to which a ﬂuid resists ﬂow under an applied forc e) is relatively high. In turbulent ﬂow, the speed of the ﬂuid at any given point is continuously undergoing changes in both magnitude and direction. Reynolds demonstrated that the transition from laminar to turbulent ﬂow in a pipe depends upon the value of a mathematical quantity equal to the velocity of ﬂow (V ) times the diameter of the tube (D) times the mass density (ρ) of the ﬂuid divided by its absolute viscosity (µ). The “Reynolds number,” as it is called, is determined by the following equation:Several students designed similar experiments to observe ﬂow rates of different liquids. To conduct the experiments, the students were given the following apparatus: Liquid supply tank with clear test section tube and ‘bell mouth’ entrance 1 Rotameter to measure the velocity of ﬂow (ﬂow rate) Tap water • Motor oil 4, 10-ft long smooth pipes of various diameters: 0.25-inch, 0.50-inch, 0.75-inch, 1.0-inchFigure 1 illustrates an approximation of the set-up of each experiment.Figure 2 shows approximate viscosities of the water and motor oils used in the experiments.Experiment 1In Experiment 1, students began with a pipe of diameter 0.25 inches. The pipe was set first at a 15° angle and tap water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe. The velocity of flow (V) was measured. The pipe was then set at a 30° angle, a 45° angle, and a 60° angle, water was released steadily from the tank into the pipe, and the velocity of flow was measured. The process was then repeated for each diameter of pipe using the same amount of water each time. All data were recorded in Table 1. Temperature of the water was held constant at 20°C.Experiment 2In the second experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil A and the processes were repeated. The results are given in Table 2.Experiment 3In a third experiment, the tap water was replaced by Motor Oil B and the processes were repeated.Q.Which of the following conclusions is best supported by information in the passage? As viscosity increases

View answer

Top Courses for ACTView all

ACT Mock Test Series 2025

Biology for ACT

How to Prepare for ACT

Mathematics for ACT

Chemistry for ACT

Top Courses for ACT

View all

Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for ACT 2025 is part of ACT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the ACT exam syllabus. Information about Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for ACT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for ACT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for ACT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Scientist 1: This scientist asserts that drilling for oil should be performed in the ocean. Scientist 1 claims that in the ocean, the oil is at a shorter depth below the Earth’s surface than on dry land. The shorter drilling depth is more ideal for access by drills.Scientist 2: Scientist 2 believes that drilling for oil should be performed on dry land and not underwater. This is due to the fact that water is at a higher pressure than is observed on the surface of Earth. Scientist 2 asserts that drilling at the lower pressure will be less likely to damage the equipment resulting in an unsuccessful event.Experiment: The scientists conduct various experiments. The data that the scientists collect indicates the depth at which it is necessary to drill on land and in the ocean in order to reach. The other data that the scientist collect is on the pressure that the equipment will need to experience while drilling for oil at each location.If a third option was present for drilling on a coastal region that allows for the short drilling depth and for drilling to be done on land, which scientist would support drilling at this location?a)Cannot be determined from the given informationb)Scientist 2, since the drilling depth is shortc)Neither scientist would want to drill here because it is a non-ideal loactiond)Both of the scientist would want to drill here, since it combines the benefits of both locationsCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice ACT tests.

Explore Courses for ACT exam