A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, : GMAT Problem Solving (PS)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 17:56

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 805
Location: London
Followers: 105

Kudos [?]: 957 [1] , given: 25

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 10:19
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

58% (02:48) correct 42% (02:22) wrong based on 81 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg}. This set is good enough to weight any object having an integral weight betweem 1Kg and 63Kg (Eg. 19Kg = 16Kg + 2Kg + 1Kg). If the 4Kg weight is lost, how many weights between 1Kg & 63Kg can no longer be measured ?

A) 16
B) 24
C) 28
D) 32
E) 36
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 36583
Followers: 7087

Kudos [?]: 93283 [9] , given: 10555

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 10:54
9
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
shrouded1 wrote:
Here is an interesting question :

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg}. This set is good enough to weight any object having an integral weight betweem 1Kg and 63Kg (Eg. 19Kg = 16Kg + 2Kg + 1Kg). If the 4Kg weight is lost, how many weights between 1Kg & 63Kg can no longer be measured ?

A) 16
B) 24
C) 28
D) 32
E) 36

Consider the following example: how many different selections are possible from $$n$$ people (including a subset with 0 members and a subset with all $$n$$ members)?

$$C^0_n+C^1_n+C^2_n+...+C^n_n=2^n$$ --> so, number of different subsets from a set with $$n$$ different terms is $$2^n$$ (this include one empty subset). Or another way: each person has 2 choices, either to be included or not to be included in the subset, so # of total subsets is $$2^n$$.

Next, from a set {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg} obviously no term can be obtained by adding any number of other terms.

So, from a set with 6 different terms {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg} we can form $$2^6-1=63$$ subsets each of which will have different sum (minus one empty subset) --> we can weight 63 different weights;

From a set with 5 different terms {1Kg, 2Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg} we can form $$2^5-1=31$$ subsets each of which will have different sum (minus one empty subset) --> we can weight 31 different weights;

Which means that if 4Kg weight is lost 63-31=32 weights can no longer be measured.

_________________
Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 805
Location: London
Followers: 105

Kudos [?]: 957 [1] , given: 25

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 11:02
1
KUDOS
Good solution, alluding to a binary notation of a number.

Here is another way to think of the problem :

We can form :
1 {1}
2 {2}
3 {1,2}
But we cannot form any of 4 through to 7 without a 4.
So 4 numbers we cannot form up till 7

Next look at the next set of numbers from 8 to 15
Notice that this is set is nothing but :
8+{0,1,2,3,..,7}
But we know from this that we cannot form a 4,5,6,7
So if we count up till 15, there are 2x4=8 numbers in all that we cannot form

Next look at the numbers from 16 to 31
Same patter repeats
This is 16+{0,1,2,...,15}
And we know from 0,..,15 there are 8 numbers we cannot form.
So from 16 to 31 there are 8 more ... hence 2x8=16 numbers between 1 and 31

and this patter goes on ...

For numbers upto 63, it will be 2x16=32

_________________
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 481
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 11:37
Both the solution mentioned above are good,

Is there any quicker way to deal with this.
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 805
Location: London
Followers: 105

Kudos [?]: 957 [0], given: 25

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 16:37
There is one more way to do this, but that involves knowledge of a binary notation of a number (a concept not tested on the GMAT). Here is the solution :

In binary a number <=63 can be represented in 6 digits.
Of this 4 represents the 3rd digit from the right.
The number of 6 digit binary numbers possible forcing the 3rd digit to be 1 (all the numbers that need 4) is exactly 2^5 or 32
_________________
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 333
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 19:19
shrouded1 wrote:
Good solution, alluding to a binary notation of a number.

Here is another way to think of the problem :

We can form :
1 {1}
2 {2}
3 {1,2}
But we cannot form any of 4 through to 7 without a 4.
So 4 numbers we cannot form up till 7

Next look at the next set of numbers from 8 to 15
Notice that this is set is nothing but :
8+{0,1,2,3,..,7}
But we know from this that we cannot form a 4,5,6,7
So if we count up till 15, there are 2x4=8 numbers in all that we cannot form

Next look at the numbers from 16 to 31
Same patter repeats
This is 16+{0,1,2,...,15}
And we know from 0,..,15 there are 8 numbers we cannot form.
So from 16 to 31 there are 8 more ... hence 2x8=16 numbers between 1 and 31

and this patter goes on ...

For numbers upto 63, it will be 2x16=32

I was doing it this way ... however, lost trach somewhere in the middle. Realize that rather than doing all the way from 1 - 63 in one go, it is better to take it in batches. Thanks.
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 333
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2010, 19:20
onedayill wrote:
Both the solution mentioned above are good,

Is there any quicker way to deal with this.

Bunuel's method is faster, but needs slightly more undertstanding.
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 464
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GMAT 1: Q V0
GPA: 3.23
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 433 [2] , given: 11

### Show Tags

20 Dec 2012, 21:31
2
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
shrouded1 wrote:
Here is an interesting question :

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg}. This set is good enough to weight any object having an integral weight betweem 1Kg and 63Kg (Eg. 19Kg = 16Kg + 2Kg + 1Kg). If the 4Kg weight is lost, how many weights between 1Kg & 63Kg can no longer be measured ?

A) 16
B) 24
C) 28
D) 32
E) 36

Originally there could be $$2*2*2*2*2*2=2^6=64$$ combinations of weight. Now that we took 1 weight off, we get $$2*2*2*2*2=2^5=32$$ combinations of weight.

What is lost? $$64-32=32$$

In case you are wondering why 2 was multiplied n times, it's because 2 represents two things: BEING SELECTED and NOT BEING SELECTED.
_________________

Impossible is nothing to God.

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 13468
Followers: 575

Kudos [?]: 163 [0], given: 0

Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2016, 07:16
Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 167
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Healthcare
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.5
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 70 [0], given: 39

Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2016, 09:00
Here's how I thought about it: For each weight, there are two possibilities; either it's included or it's not. So, for 6 weights, there are (2*2*2*2*2*2) = 2^6 possibilities, minus 1 (the case where there are no weights) or 63 possibilities. Therefore, if we take away one of the weights, there are now 2^5 - 1 = 31 possibilities. 63-31 = 32.

Aside: Think about it similiarly to how you think about counting the total number of factors from a number's prime factorization: Either the factor is included or it's not.
Manager
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 67
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 8

Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2016, 09:16
the first thought i had was 5c0 +5c1 + 5c2 + 5c3 +5c4 +5c5 = 32. This is because i need to choose a 4 and that can be selected in the following combinations. with each one. on solving it gives me 32. 32 sets will be lost.
Hope this helps
Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,   [#permalink] 05 May 2016, 09:16
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 The average weight of a group of 30 friends increases by 1 kg when the 6 13 Mar 2016, 11:40
7 In 1 kg mixture of sand and iron, 20% is iron. How much sand 4 17 Mar 2014, 05:40
2 A weight loss company has a 50+ promotion that enables a member to ear 2 15 Jul 2010, 12:04
15 The average weight of 15 items is 8 kg. The least average 7 31 Dec 2009, 18:42
11 A certain elevator has a safe weight limit of 2,000 pounds. 9 11 Mar 2008, 15:20
Display posts from previous: Sort by