Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!

Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 500,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club

Registration gives you:

Tests

Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.

Applicant Stats

View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more

Books/Downloads

Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

When more than two absolutes are present though, it becomes complicated to use the squaring approach. Another method seems to work better. I'll briefly solve your given problem using this other method.

|3x-2| <= |2x-5|

1. First you find the pivotal/critical points:
i.e.
a. you set 3x-2 = 0, so x = 2/3
b. you set 2x-5 = 0, so x = 5/2

2. If you take the 2 values, 2/3 and 5/2 on the number line, you get three domains
a. left of 2/3
b. b/w 2/3 and 5/2
c. right of 5/2

Next, you modify the intial inequation for these three domains, by taking out the modulus signs.

a. So, for x < 2/3 the inequation becomes,
-3x+2 <= -2x +5
(since both terms become negative for x < 2/3, you reverse their signs)
-3 <= x

b. For x b/w 2/3 and 5/2
3x -2 <= -2x + 5
(since 2x-5 becomes negative for x b/w 2/3 and 5/2, you reverse its sign)
or x <= 7/5

c. For x > 5/2
3x-2 <= 2x-5
x <= -3 (not valid since x is assumed to be > 5/2 above)

Combining the above three results, you get
-3 <= x <= 7/5
------------------

Credit for this method goes to user "Fig" who has posted several problems/solutions using this approach. Please search and look at all those problems if you have any questions. Manhattan GMAT also uses this approach.

Last edited by oops on 13 Jul 2007, 22:09, edited 1 time in total.

When more than two absolutes are present though, it becomes complicated to use the squaring approach. Another method seems to work better. I'll briefly solve your given problem using this other method.

|3x-2| <= |2x-5|

1. First you find the pivotal/critical points: i.e. a. you set 3x-2 = 0, so x = 2/3 b. you set 2x-5 = 0, so x = 5/2

2. If you take the 2 values, 2/3 and 5/2 on the number line, you get three domains a. left of 2/3 b. b/w 2/3 and 5/2 c. right of 5/2

Next, you modify the intial inequation for these three domains, by taking out the modulus signs.

a. So, for x < 2/3 the inequation becomes, -3x+2 <= -2x +5 (since both terms become negative for x < 2/3, you reverse their signs) -3 <= x

b. For x b/w 2/3 and 5/2 3x -2 <= -2x + 5 (since 2x-5 becomes negative for x b/w 2/3 and 5/2, you reverse its sign) or x <7> 5/2 3x-2 <= 2x-5 x <3> 5/2 above)

Combining the above three results, you get -3 <= x <= 7/5 ------------------

Credit for this method goes to user "Fig" who has posted several problems/solutions using this approach. Please search and look at all those problems if you have any questions. Manhattan GMAT also uses this approach.

Well ... Finally, I should not post ... All is in your post :D

Gosh, Fig (master of absolutes!), didn't see you also responded to this mesg - we must've been typing it up simultaneously - credit goes to you - glad to see you back...