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:

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for [#permalink]

Show Tags

19 Sep 2005, 20:27

But 6 is divisible by an odd integer other than 1. It's divisible by 3.

The only positive integers greater than 1 that don't have any odd factors greater than 1 are powers of 2. So statement 2 is sufficient on its own.

... And once again I just answered my own question. (I feel dumb now). I'd initially answered D, thinking that statement 1 was also sufficient in itself. But of course, 192 is a multiple of 64, and 192 is not a power of 2. So D is wrong. B it is.

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for [#permalink]

Show Tags

19 Sep 2005, 20:31

coffeeloverfreak wrote:

But 6 is divisible by an odd integer other than 1. It's divisible by 3.

The only positive integers greater than 1 that don't have any odd factors greater than 1 are powers of 2. So statement 2 is sufficient on its own.

... And once again I just answered my own question. (I feel dumb now). I'd initially answered D, thinking that statement 1 was also sufficient in itself. But of course, 192 is a multiple of 64, and 192 is not a power of 2. So D is wrong. B it is.

You right. This is really tricky if one doesnt know these number system properties (especially if she is not good in number picking like me).

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 Oct 2005, 18:24

i think it is E.

II) states that it is not divisible by any odd number > 1, which implies k is even. however, what we need to say if K is a power of 2. For example, 10 is even , but is not a power of 2. I am assuming here that the notation, 2^ r , denotes, 2 raised to r and not 2 multiplied by r.

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 Oct 2005, 19:04

We're given k > 1, r > 0. We're asked if k = 2^r

From statement 1, we're told k is a multiple of 2^6. This could be 3(2^6), 4(2^6). Since there are so many values of k, we can't tell.

From statement 2, we're told k is not divisbile by any odd integer greater than 1. This means k is even and a power of 2. Any other even number that has a prime factor other than 2 will be divisible by any odd integer > 1. For e.g., if k=18, then 18 = 3*3*2. It's divisible by 3. However, if k = 16, then 2^4 and this is equal to 2^r if r is 4.

The answer B is correct if we're asked if k can be represented in the form 2^r where r is a positive value.

However, we're asked here if k EQUALS 2^r and we do not have information for r.

gmatclubot

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for
[#permalink]
05 Oct 2005, 19:04

Happy New Year everyone! Before I get started on this post, and well, restarted on this blog in general, I wanted to mention something. For the past several months...

It’s quickly approaching two years since I last wrote anything on this blog. A lot has happened since then. When I last posted, I had just gotten back from...

Post-MBA I became very intrigued by how senior leaders navigated their career progression. It was also at this time that I realized I learned nothing about this during my...