▶ Your Answer : According to the reading, there is ample
support for the author’s claim that the origin of glow on Venus can be
explained by many possible sources. However, the professor in the lecture gives
several reasons as a rebuttal to the author’s point.
First, the professor contends that chemical
reaction can not explain the ashen light. Carbon monoxide and oxygen can
recombine to form carbon dioxide on releasing the light. However, it is faint to
see accurately. It can only see on a powerful telescope. When observing the original
telescope, it might be something else. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s
claim that the ashen light could be the product of a chemical process in Venus
due to the recombination between molecules.
Second, the professor insists that it is
not true that the glow is sunlight reflected off clouds. This is because the
ashen light happens very rarely, yet there is constant sunlight on Venus. The ashen
light would be detected more often if the source were sunlight. This counters
the reading passage’s suggestion that the ashen light is reflected sunlight.
Finally, the professor argues that it cannot
be true that aurorae are the glow in Venus. Plasma can only enters an atmosphere
when it is drawn by a magnetic field. However, on Veuns, there is not a magnetic
field. As a result, there is no way that aurorae can occur on Venus. This refutes
the reading passage’s that the glow observed on Venus may be aurorae. |