ClosingInOn780

In a certain private university, there are 3 schools and each school has 10 advisors. Exactly 5 advisors are in all 3 schools and each pair of schools has 6 advisors in common. How many distinct advisors are there in the entire university? I tried to solve using a 3 set venn diagram... Question Source: EZ Solutions: Math Practice Advanced Workbook ( Part 6 - Question 3). Page 130. Answer is :

Pl. refer OG guide 12th edition Q30. -------------- When 2^(2n) = 16, then CASE 1: => 2^(2n) = (2)^4 In this case, n =2 OR CASE 2: 2^(2n) = (-2)^4. In this case , n can not be equal to 2 (?). What am I missing, because the OG guide uses on CASE 1 in its explanation and delares (B) as an answer to the question. Thanks.

Hi MBAChase - For such a question what way could be faster - Please suggest a quicker solution. Thanks

Without picking numbers - is my approach and solution correct What is the remainder when the positive integer x is divided by 8? (1) When x is divided by 12, the remainder is 5. (2) When x is divided by 18, the remainder is 11. SOLUTION) Consider (1) and the question stem: x = 8a + r ( where "a" is some integer - We have to find "r") x = 12b + 5 ( where "b" is some integer) Subtracting the two equations: 0 = 12b - 8a + 5 - r => r-5 = 4(3b-2a) => r = 4(3b-2a) + 5 => r = 4(3b-2a+1) + 1 Deduce that "r" is a multiple of 4 plus 1, i.e. when r is divided by 4 we get a remainder of 1. We don't get an exact value of "r". So (1) is insufficient. Consider (b) (2) x = 8a + r ( where "a" is some integer - We have to find "r") x = 18c + 11 ( where "c" is some integer) Subtracting: 0 = 18c - 8a + 11 - r => r - 11 = 18c -8a => r = 18c -8a + 11 => r = 2(9c-4a+5) + 1 This implies "r" is a multiple of 2 plus 1. Again we dont get an exact value of "r" Combine (1) and (2) From (1) - r is a multiple of 4 plus 1. From (2) - r is a multiple of 2 plus 1. If "r" divided by 4 leaves a remainder of 1. Then "r" divided by 2 will also leave a remainder of 1. Consider the opposite - if "r" divided by 2 leaves a remainder of 1, then it is not necessary that "r" divided by 4 will also leave a remainder of 1. So together NOT sufficient Hence (E).

Any updates on this query. Thanks!

Source: From 1000 Sc. 91. Although one link in the chain was demonstrated to be weak, but not sufficiently so to require the recall of the automobile. (A) demonstrated to be weak, but not sufficiently so to require (B) demonstrated as weak, but it was not sufficiently so that it required © demonstrably weak, but not sufficiently so to require (D) demonstrably weak, it was not so weak as to require (E) demonstrably weak, it was not weak enough that it required ------------------ If one was to modify (A) above so that after the comma we have -- (A) .........................., but not so weak as to require would A still be wrong because the clause "but......as to require" lacks a subject or pronoun reference? thanks for helping..

I know that (A) is right. I was just asking conceptually - that why is the "it" not considered confusing because it could equally well point to the nearest singular antecedent "Oval Office"

(A) is the correct answer. But one doubt i have is that the "it" in the sentence could also refer to the nearest singular antecedent "Oval Office" --- why is this choice correct then.... 26. A recording system was so secretly installed and operated in the Kennedy Oval Office that even Theodore C. Sorensen, the White House counsel, did not know it existed. (A) A recording system was so secretly installed and operated in the Kennedy Oval Office that (B) So secret was a recording system installation and operation in the Kennedy Oval Office © It was so secret that a recording system was installed and operated in the Kennedy Oval Office (D) A recording system that was so secretly installed and operated in the Kennedy Oval Office (E) Installed and operated so secretly in the Kennedy Oval Office was a recording system that

- " Considered to be" is an incorrect idiom in Choice (B). This rules out B. What about the last fragemnt in the sentence " ,virtually unavailable outside Yokohama". Does this fragment also make the choice (B) wrong because this fragment does not contain a subject, a pronoun reference which can refer to a NOUN ( or subject) in the main clause??? 30. A special Japanese green tea called genmai-cha contains brown rice and is considered as a delicacy fit for a gourmet by most Japanese, though it is virtually unavailable outside Yokohama. (A) A special Japanese green tea called genmai-cha contains brown rice and is considered as a delicacy fit for a gourmet by most Japanese, though it is virtually unavailable outside Yokohama. (B) Considered to be a delicacy fit for a gourmet by most Japanese, genmai-cha is a special green tea that contains brown rice, virtually unavailable outside Yokohama. © A special Japanese green tea called genmai-cha contains brown rice and is considered a gourmet delicacy by most Japanese, though it is virtually unavailable outside Yokohama. (D) Most Japanese consider genmai-cha, a special green tea which contains brown rice, as a delicacy virtually unavailable outside Yokohama. (E) Though virtually unavailable outside Yokohama, most Japanese consider genmai-cha, a special green tea that contains brown rice, a gourmet delicacy.

Hi CanadianPhD - Congratulations on your performance. I have taken GMAT once before and my score also was Q43 and V26. I just wanted to ask the following: How many months/days after your first GMAT attempt did you take the GMAT again. Also how long did you study per day. Thanks and good luck!!

What is the best strategy for CR? Is it just solving as many questions as is possible. Also in addition to OG-12, what test prep materials offer standard questions for GMAT preperation. I am planning to use OG and 1000 CRs only. Is that ok Or should i change/add any material? Thanks!

the answer is (D) in my opinion. Here is how i think about it. Please correct me if i am wrong. Part 1) x/3y > 1/3 => x/y > 1 Even though we don't know the sign of x and y, we can multiply by (3 - a positive number) on both sides without wanting to know whether to flip the sign. Then either both x and y are +ive or both are -ive. If both are +ive, the obviously .... x> y If both are -ive, then the two -ive signs cancel out and still x/y > 1 = > x > y so 1 is sufficient. 2) Sufficient as shown above.

The following question If zy 1. z 2. y My answer to this question is (E). Deduction from question stem: zy y(z-x) = > y z OR y > 0 Or x 1) given z Pick Numbers: x = 7 and z = 3 => | x - z | = 4 AND | z | = 3 and | x | = 7 Clearly | x - z | + | x | not equal to | z | --- answer is NO But Pick : x = -7 and z = -11 = > | -7 - (-11)| = 4 AND | x | = | -7 | = 7 Clearly: | x - z | + | x | EQUALS | z | ---- answer is YES 1 is NOT SUFFICIENT because we see a contradiction above. 2) Given y z ( which is the Duplicate of statement 1 above) 2 is NOT SUFFICIENT Since these are duplicate conditions - we can not combine them Hence Answer is (E).

Hi - Take a good look at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa. Ames, as a place might be hidden - gr8 dept.

Thank you Sason. Your explanation is very simple and straightforward. I, for some reason, always try to tie a pronoun (singular or plural) - to its nearest antecedent. and so long as the pronoun and the antecedent agree in number - i use it like a blanket rule - It seems like the structure of the sentence will always decide if we can or can't tie a pronoun to its antecedent - even when they both agree in number...Any thoughts are appreciated,, regards ClosingInOn780