Q18

[tzyc]

How can we know it would not cause more than a minor disturbance??
Is it because since it says the response to a disturbance is proportional to that disturbance? So the grain of sand=small disturbance=a minor disturbance...?
But even in that sentence, it talks about the response to the disturbance so how can we infer aboutwhat it'd cause?
(By the way 2nd para's theory and 5th para's theory is different so I thought we only use the information in 2nd para...if they are the same, it would contradct since it says "when a grain of sand is added it can start an avalanche of any size, including a 'catastrophic' event"...)

Thank you

[maryadkins]

How can we know it would not cause more than a minor disturbance??
Is it because since it says the response to a disturbance is proportional to that disturbance? So the grain of sand=small disturbance=a minor disturbance...?

Yes! Exactly. The other answer choices are all wrong for this same reason.

You are also correct that the second paragraph is about what was previously believed by investigators and what we're dealing with in this question, not the fifth:

(By the way 2nd para's theory and 5th para's theory is different so I thought we only use the information in 2nd para...if they are the same, it would contradct since it says "when a grain of sand is added it can start an avalanche of any size, including a 'catastrophic' event"...)

[sweetsecret]

I looked at this explanation, but I'm still really confused. Can someone explain to me why A is correct and the other answer choices are incorrect? I went with C because I considered of the analogy they give "they assumed that in large interactive systems the response to a disturbance is proportional to that disturbance." So, I thought since those were the three situations given, they would be proportional to each of those.