LearnHub

ok. thank u !

option D is the right answer. I agree.

But oLahav, why half? has the ratio been mentioned anywhere in the question?

Given x and y are +ve integers. Therefore, if x/y must be an integer, then x must be an integral multiple of y.

1 -> Every prime factor of y is also a prime factor of x. Consider: x = 18 (2^{1 * 3}2), y = 12 (2^{2 * 3}1).

Here, every prime factor of y (2,3) is also a prime factor of x. But x/y is not an integer.

2 -> Every factor of y is also a factor of x.

Consider y = 12 (2^{2 * 3}1). Its factors are: 1,2,3,4,6 and 12.

Now, if each of these is a factor of x => x is an integral multiple of y with the highest factor of x being y itself.

Therefore, answer is (B).

C.P of 1200 calculators = $6000 => $5 a piece.

profit: part 1 = (3/4 of 1200) * (50% of $5) = 900 * 2.5 = 1800 + 450 = $2250

part 2 = (1/4 of 1200) * (20% of $5) = 300 * (1/5 * 5) = $300

total profit = 2250 + 300 = $2550.

statement 2 alone is obviously not sufficient.

statement 1 alone is also not sufficient, because we don’t know whether s = 0. All that statement 1 says (assuming s != 0) is : r + t = 2s => t – s = s – r —--> ( I )

Now, equation ( I ) can be satisfied for many integer values of r, s, t (not necessarily consecutive i.e., common difference is not necessarily 1).

Even after combining both statements, we have no clear answers: for ex: (r,s,t) = (0, 5, 10), (1, 5, 9), (2, 5, 8) etc.

Answer is E.

oLahav, could you please modify the question to “non-zero number” ?

Your question, as well as answer, is correct for everything else except for 0 because in the final part of ur question you mention “divided by the original number”, which is not possible with 0 as the original number.

The correct choice is D. Why?

Yes, as Aravinthkumar and oLahav pointed out, avoid options with “being”. That eliminates A & B.

To narrow your choice to one of the remaining three, understand what was reduced with the introduction of a microwave (time required???). Preferably, that must follow immdiately after the word “reduced” so that the association is clear.

But then, time required to do what? To make dinner. This is the purpose that the microwave serves. This must be made clear too.

Finally, note that a range of marks, a duration of time etc. are usually described with the usage “from X to Y”.

oLahav, I agree with “have2”. Our average gives the value for ” Documents produced per week per employee/staff member”.

So, don’t you agree that the question should have been “How many documents a week, on average, does a staff member produce?” rather than “How many documents a week on average does my entire staff produce?”. Doing so may improve clarity.

I guess C is the right answer. Pls correct me if I’m wrong.

Using “when” twice leads us to conclude wrongly that the onset of snow and the fall in temperature are two independent events. But they are clearly related. One leads to the other.

I chose the supposedly right answer but I have a question. Pls correct me if I’m wrong.

Is the part of the underlined sentence between the commas i.e., “ranks as…...football league” intended to serve the purpose of a modifying phrase? If so, isn’t this sentence wrong?

On the other hand, if it was not intended to be a modifying phrase, shouldn’t we remove the first comma (placed before “ranks”) ?

“Surpassed only” or “surpassed by only” is correct usage because the author intends to convey the meaning that EPL is surpassed by the Champions League and no other.

“Only” must be used as a “delimiter” before the part we wish to modify.

“second most” is correct because the author intends to convey the meaning that out of all the leagues, the EPL is next only to the Champions League (in popularity). this requires superlative not comparative degree.

“ranks” is correct usage because the English Premier League is a collective noun and therefore, singular.

Well, I chose the supposedly right answer but I have a question. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Shouldn’t the last part of the sentence be “because of his leg injury” rather than “due to his leg injury” ?

Isn’t “due to” used normally in the sense of “caused by” ?

Well, I chose the supposedly right answer but I have a question. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Shouldn’t the last part of the sentence be “because of his leg injury” rather than “due to his leg injury” ?

Isn’t “due to” used normally in the sense of “caused by” ?

Well, most of us do !

xmonkee, glad to know that you are Indian and that you are not another ultra-nationalist. Now, irrespective of the merits or demerits of your argument, you have shown us all one fine example of the Indians you were talking about !

Thank You.

I’m an Indian and my experience here has always been that if you want to deal with a top official, you do it through his aides. Chances are that you will find your way through his assistants.

May be this has something to do with the high levels of corruption. It is not officially acknowledged to be a major problem but is all too common. From Primary School to University Education and Public Services, bosses do not prefer to deal with you directly. The Personal Assistant is usually the mediator and is, sometimes, more powerful than the boss.

Allex, you are right in saying that ” Long before it became a popular resort” is a modifying phrase. I guess there is merit in writing ” Long before it became a popular resort, Florida was home to Abe Carr and he remained there for the rest of his life as a performer and a creator of art.” May be there is something that we ignored earlier.

Can someone correct me if I am wrong. This new phrasing looks better to me than the option B. The subject of the modifying phrase immediately follows it and the part ” he remained there for the rest of his life as a performer and a creator of art.” immediately follows the subject Abe Carr.

Thanks Allex. To me, the value of LearnHub is proved in cases like this.

Mohit, the underlined part of the sentence is a modifying phrase….if you notice what follows it. And, the meaning of the entire sentence is – According to ….suggestion, you should have started your research in your previous academic term.

E is wrong because it is wordy. The difficult parts of GMAT SC deal with style.

oLahav, I guess I will have to disagree with you again ! You asked for the number, not the fraction. Again, poor wording problem :-(

Saying 1/3 or 33.33% or whatever tells me only how many cows out of every “100” cows…..not how many cows out of the total !

That will be known only when I know the total. So C it is.

Read the “exact” wording of your question a hundred times if you will. You asked “how many out of the total number”.....not “how many out of every 100”.......hope you will realise there is nothing “tricky” in this, unless you believe that “tricky” has a meaning different from what is commonly understood.

Good one sureshbala ! Thanks for contributing.

Well, I agree, but only in the sense that introducing it would do no great harm at least ! Otherwise, I’m not so enthusiastic. Yes, I am Indian and I’m a Cricket fan, but after many disappointing Olympic games, I’m only now beginning to realize that Indians play other sports too and not just participate ! India saw three heroes in three different sports after many years. Let the new heroes celebrate for a while before we dump them for our favourite cricketers :-)