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:

In Patton City, days are categorized as having heavy [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 12:55

14

This post received KUDOS

64

This post was BOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

23% (02:39) correct
77% (02:08) wrong based on 2990 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In Patton City, days are categorized as having heavy rainfall (more than two inches), moderate rainfall (more than one inch, but no more than two inches), light rainfall (at least a trace, but no more than one inch), or no rainfall. In 1990, there were fewer days with light rainfall than in 1910 and fewer with moderate rainfall, yet total rainfall for the year was 20 percent higher in 1990 than in 1910.

If the statements above are true, then it is also possible that in Patton City

(A) the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 (B) the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 (C) the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 (D) the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 (E) the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910

In Patton City, days are categorized as having heavy rainfall (more than two inches), moderate rainfall (more than one inch, but no more than two inches), light rainfall (at least a trace, but no more than one inch), or no rainfall. In 1990, there were fewer days with light rainfall than in 1910 and fewer with moderate rainfall, yet total rainfall for the year was 20 percent higher in 1990 than in 1910. If the statements above are true, then it is also possible that in Patton City A. the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 definitely possible. Consider in 1990 one day about 1000000000 inches fell. (just kidding, but u get the point) B. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 can't be true because we know moderate and light says were fewer in 1990 than in 1910

C. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 same problem as in B

D. the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 not mathematically possible. We can only get twice the amount of rainfall if the number of moderate days were the same and all the moderate days in 1990 have 2 inches of rain and all the moderate rain days have 1 inch of rain in 1910

E. the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910 not possible (unless there were more months in 1990 )since we are told total in 1990 was hight really tuff one

"the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910" however the amount of rain in 1990 can be more on these days than in 1910. Since heavy rainfall is defined as anything greater than 2 inches.

First I chose D, then after reviewing I see how A is the correct answer.

From the first statement we know

1990 has fewer light rainfall days fewer moderate rainfall days 20% more total rainfall

I think the question's design is for you to search for an explanation for the difference. We all know the questions:

"Which one of the following would best explain the seeming contradiction" or some wording similar......So this is the way we approach this question, that leads us to find D as a possible explanation.

But they questions is which could possibly be true.

You could read choice A as follows:

It is possible that in Patton City the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910.

Yes it is possible, why not. For example....

In 1990 we could have 10 days with heavy rainfall, and in 1910 we could have 11 days with heavy rainfall.

This example reminds us that when we see which could be true.....we should keep a very open mind.

I tried out some sample data for D. 1910 --> 100 moderate days x 1.0000000000000000000000000000000001 inches each day = c. 100 inches on moderate days 1990 --> 99 moderate days x 2 inches each day = 198 inches

(A) the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 >>>> The author says lower light and moderate rainfall, YET only 20% more rainfall in 1990. This means there was some other factor that led to lower total rainfall. Above argument solves this !

(B) the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 >>> There is no such rainfall listed in the question. So rejected.

(C) the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 >>> There is no such rainfall listed.

(D) the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 >>> If 1910 received 1.5inch of rainfall, then 1990 would have received 3inch rainfall. But 2+ inch means heavy rainfall. So this is incorrect too.

(E) the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910 >> This will mean that 1990 had less rainfall than 1910.

Here is why (A) the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 is the answer:

On first glance this answer seems the opposite of what we are going for. Surely, Patton City had more days with heavy rain in 1990 than in 1910, otherwise how could one possibly account for the 20% increase in rain from 1910 to 1990. But here is the thing: even if Patton City had fewer days with 2+ inches of rain in 1990 than in 1910, if those days were marked by heavily deluges, then 1990 would have more inches of rain than 1910. Let me illustrate: Let's say that in 1990 Patton City had five days with 2+ inches of rain (Day 1: 4 inches, Day 2: 5 inches, Day 3: 6 inches, Day 4: 5 inches, Day 5: 3 inches). In 1910 Patton City had six rainy days with 2+ inches or rain (Day 1 : 2.5 inches, Day 2: 2.3 inches, Day 3, 2.4 inches...etc.). You can see that, despite fewer 2+ inches days, 1990 has far more inches of rainfall from 2+ inches days than 1910 does.
_________________

A. the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 -> cannot say..

B. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 -> cannot say...

C. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 -> sounds good

D. the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 -> may or may not be

E. the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910 -> cannot be
_________________

In Patton City, days are categorized as having heavy rainfall (more than two inches), moderate rainfall (more than one inch, but no more than two inches), light rainfall (at least a trace, but no more than one inch), or no rainfall. In 1990, there were fewer days with light rainfall than in 1910 and fewer with moderate rainfall, yet total rainfall for the year was 20 percent higher in 1990 than in 1910. If the statements above are true, then it is also possible that in Patton City A. the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 definitely possible. Consider in 1990 one day about 1000000000 inches fell. (just kidding, but u get the point) B. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 can't be true because we know moderate and light says were fewer in 1990 than in 1910

C. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 same problem as in B

D. the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 not mathematically possible. We can only get twice the amount of rainfall if [color=#8000FF]the number of moderate days were the same and all the moderate days in 1990 have 2 inches of rain and all the moderate rain days have 1 inch of rain in 1910[/color]

Nowhere in the question it is mentioned that no of moderate days were the same.??? Please correct me if I am wrong E. the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910 not possible (unless there were more months in 1990 )since we are told total in 1990 was hight really tuff one

C - the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910. This contradicts with the stem that in 1990 we have had fewer days of moderate and light rainfall. So ruled out..

D- the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910. Lets assume in 1910 we have had three days of moderate rainfall and in 1990 the best scenario we could have two. Assume, worst case scenario we received 1 Unit of rainfall in all days in 1900 thus total 3 units and in 1990 we received 2 units (the max we could recieve for moderate) each day. Thus, it comes to total of 4 Units. But , 4<3*2. This contradicts the statement and this is the most favourable case that we could assume for 1990.

Why its A: A) the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 The number can be lower (assume just a difference of one day) , but the intensityof rainfall received 1990 could be substantially greater than in 1990 to offset this difference.

In Patton City, days are categorized as having heavy rainfall (more than two inches), moderate rainfall (more than one inch, but no more than two inches), light rainfall (at least a trace, but no more than one inch), or no rainfall. In 1990, there were fewer days with light rainfall than in 1910 and fewer with moderate rainfall, yet total rainfall for the year was 20 percent higher in 1990 than in 1910. If the statements above are true, then it is also possible that in Patton City A. the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910. doesn't help B. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 Argument only mentions 4 categories of rainfall;some rainfall is not defined. some rainfall can be no rainfall too. C. the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 Argument only mentions 4 categories of rainfall;some rainfall is not defined. some rainfall can be no rainfall too. D. the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 This says inches of rainfall was higher; helps E. the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910 doesn't help

D is not possible because it contradicts the prompt.

The prompt says "moderate rainfall (more than one inch, but no more than two inches)".

D says that the total number of incheas with moderate rainfall was more than twice what it had been. Since moderate rainfall, as defined in the prompt, is more than one but less than two, it isn't possible for this answer to work.

In Patton City, days are categorized as having heavy rainfall (more than two inches), moderate rainfall (more than one inch, but no more than two inches), light rainfall (at least a trace, but no more than one inch), or no rainfall. In 1990, there were fewer days with light rainfall than in 1910 and fewer with moderate rainfall, yet total rainfall for the year was 20 percent higher in 1990 than in 1910.

If the statements above are true, then it is also possible that in Patton City

(A) the number of days with heavy rainfall was lower in 1990 than in 1910 (B) the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was the same in 1990 as in 1910 (C) the number of days with some rainfall, but no more than two inches, was higher in 1990 than in 1910 (D) the total number of inches of rain that fell on days with moderate rainfall in 1990 was more than twice what it had been in 1910 (E) the average amount of rainfall per month was lower in 1990 than in 1910

I actually think this is a great question. It highlights the logic that the GMAT is looking for, and of course the trickery they're known for. They also often put verbal understanding in quant questions and math understanding in verbal questions. This is such a question. If the total rainfall was higher in 1990 than 1910, you figure there were more rainiy days in 1990, but that doesn't have to be true. All the rain could have fallen on one day (at the logical extreme) and then had 364 days of clear skies. If you understand that this is possible, then you realize that A is possible. There were 5 days of 10+ inch torrential rain in 1990, and 15 days of 2 inch downpour in 1910. More days in 1910, but more rain in 1990.

The other answer choices can be eliminated by the question stem (B, C and E) or by basic math (D). Days with moderate rainfall are between 1 and 2 inches, so at a minimum value 1.00. If they double, they will no longer count as moderate rainfall days and instead move up to heavy. The biggest difference you can have was 1.00 in 1910 and 1.99 in 1990. This will never get to double the rainfall. A is the only possibility, although it is counter-intuitive. This type of reasoning is helpful in math as well, particularly in stats when you realize that average is the most misleading characteristic of them all.

If the number of days of light, moderate & heavy rainfall are all lower in 1990, then how could the total rainfall be more?

Still not convinced with A

If in the first week it rains for one day and in the second week it rains for two days, can you conclude that it rained more in the second week? What if the one day of the first week was a full day of heavy downpour and the two days of the second week just saw light 5 minute showers each? Number of days is just one aspect. The amount of rainfall that fell on each day is another.
_________________

The stem says there are fewer days of light and moderate rain in 1990 option C directly contradicts what is written in the stem cos it essentially says that 1990 got more number of light and moderate rain days , which is false

IMO the best choice is D ....

lets say 1990 got fewer no of days for moderate + light rain but on days when it got it , the rains were closest to 2 inches whereas in 1910 u got more number of such days , but its possible each day u got it closer to the lower end of the slab which is around one

After days of waiting, sharing the tension with other applicants in forums, coming up with different theories about invites patterns, and, overall, refreshing my inbox every five minutes to...

I was totally freaking out. Apparently, most of the HBS invites were already sent and I didn’t get one. However, there are still some to come out on...

In early 2012, when I was working as a biomedical researcher at the National Institutes of Health , I decided that I wanted to get an MBA and make the...