Archaeological dating often relies on carbon-14 analysis, which measures the decay of radioactive carbon in organic materials to determine their...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Archaeological dating often relies on carbon-14 analysis, which measures the decay of radioactive carbon in organic materials to determine their age. This technique has proven highly reliable for dating wood, bone, and other organic artifacts up to 50,000 years old. However, an archaeologist argues that this method frequently cannot provide accurate dates for certain ancient pottery fragments.
Which detail, if true, would most directly support the archaeologist's claim?
Carbon-14 dating requires organic materials, but many pottery fragments contain no organic compounds.
Ancient pottery fragments are often found in layers with other dateable materials.
The oldest known pottery fragments date back approximately 20,000 years.
Pottery fragments can provide valuable information about ancient civilizations.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Archaeological dating often relies on carbon-14 analysis, which measures the decay of radioactive carbon in organic materials to determine their age." |
|
| "This technique has proven highly reliable for dating wood, bone, and other organic artifacts up to 50,000 years old." |
|
| "However, an archaeologist argues that this method frequently cannot provide accurate dates for certain ancient pottery fragments." |
|
Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: While carbon-14 dating is highly reliable for organic materials, an archaeologist argues it frequently fails to accurately date certain ancient pottery fragments.
Argument Flow: The passage establishes carbon-14 dating as a reliable archaeological tool for organic materials, then introduces a specific challenge to this method's effectiveness when applied to pottery fragments.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? We need to identify which detail would most directly support the archaeologist's claim that carbon-14 dating frequently cannot provide accurate dates for certain ancient pottery fragments.
What type of answer do we need? Evidence that explains WHY this dating method fails for pottery specifically.
Any limiting keywords? N/A
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- We know carbon-14 dating works by measuring radioactive decay in organic materials, and it's reliable for wood, bone, and other organic artifacts
- The archaeologist claims this method frequently fails for pottery fragments
- So the right answer should explain why pottery is different from these other materials in a way that would make carbon-14 dating ineffective
- The key insight is that carbon-14 dating specifically requires organic materials to work
- So the right answer should show that pottery fragments often lack the organic content necessary for this dating method to function
Carbon-14 dating requires organic materials, but many pottery fragments contain no organic compounds.
✓ Correct
- This directly explains why carbon-14 dating fails for pottery - it requires organic materials, but many pottery fragments contain no organic compounds
- This perfectly matches our prethinking about pottery lacking the necessary organic content
Ancient pottery fragments are often found in layers with other dateable materials.
✗ Incorrect
- States that pottery fragments are often found with other dateable materials
- This would actually help archaeologists date pottery indirectly, not support the claim that carbon-14 dating fails
The oldest known pottery fragments date back approximately 20,000 years.
✗ Incorrect
- Provides information about the age of the oldest pottery fragments (20,000 years)
- This is well within carbon-14 dating's 50,000-year range, so it doesn't explain why the method would fail
Pottery fragments can provide valuable information about ancient civilizations.
✗ Incorrect
- States that pottery fragments provide valuable information about ancient civilizations
- This addresses pottery's informational value, not dating challenges