Respuesta :
Answer:
B - Coopers absences from the Quebec Bridge site resulted in the breaking off of the cantilever.
If Cooper had been onsite for the bridge construction, it would have saved time - allowing them to stop construction and the several dozen workers time to escape. It too valuable time to send the telegraph, to locate Cooper and have him read it as well as return the telegraph.
Answer:
E. Prior to 1907 the mathematical analysis incorporated in engineering rules of thumb was insufficient to completely assure the safety of bridges under construction.
Explanation:
Option E is the best answer. In the text is says that "the engineering 'rules of thumb' by which thousands of bridges had been built around the world went down with Quebec Bridge." This shows that the "rules of thumb" that were used in the 18th century could completely assure the safety of bridges under construction. The passage then goes on to say that engineers relied on a more rigorous mathematical analysis. This lets us infer that the original analysis was insufficient. Option A is wrong because not all bridges were unsafe for public use. There are still bridges that are used by the public today that were built in the 18th century. Option B is simply false. Option C is incorrect because we don't actually know anything about the analytical methods of the time period. Option D is also wrong because we don't know if that is the only solution to the problem.