The recently announced discovery of the first known planet orbiting a pulsar (the ultradense, pulsating remnant off the supernova explosion of a star) turned out to be based on faulty data. Had this discovery been confirmed, theorists would have had difficulty accounting for the existence of such a planet. The supernova would certainly have destroyed any preexisting planets. This particular pulsar is relatively young, allowing little time for a new planet to have coalesced, and it rotates relatively slowly, implying that it has not interacted with any nearby star since the supernova.
But newer evidence of a different pulsar with planets is more promising. This is a rapidly spurring “millisecond pulsar” thought to be a much older object that has pulled gaseous material from a stellar neighbor, causing its rotational speed to increase. Leftover, unconsumed gas around such a pulsar could, in theory, coalesce into planets. Or the pulsar’s radiation might have vaporized a companion star, providing new material for planetary formation.
2. Which of the following best describe the organization of the passage?
A:Two sets of research findings relating to similar phenomenon are mentioned, and the theoretical implication of each are discussed.
B:A theoretical explanation of a phenomenon is presented and rejected, and a more attractive alternative is offered.
C:Two independent and divergent interpretations of a set of observational data are compared and one is favored over the other.
D:An example of careless scientific research is introduced and contrasted with a more rigorous analysis of the same material.
E:The state of knowledge of an unexplainable phenomenon is outlined and an approach to further investigation is recommended.
답이 A 인데,
B, C, D가 안되는 이유를 정확히 설명을 못하겠네요..
고수님들 도와주십시오..ㅠ