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 350,000 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 a XY Plan, Y is above the line -x/2. I prefer to solve this DS with the XY plan.

Stat1 y > -1. This brings us to y above the line y=-1. The area covered could be either above -x/2 (when x>0) or below -x/2 (wehn x<10). (Fig1)

INSUFF.

Stat2 (2^x) - 4 >0
<=> 2^x > 4 = 2^2
<=> x > 2

In the XY plan, it does mean that the concerned area is at right of the line x=2. One more time, their is 2 case, y could be either above the line -x/2 (when y > 0) or below the line -x/2 (the point (3,-100)). (Fig2)

INSUFF.

Both (1) and (2): x > 2 and y > -1 represents an area with a not attainable vertice at (-1;2). By drawing the line -x/2 and this point, we observe that this point is on the line. Thus, the whole area of points such that x>2 and y>-1 is above the line -x/2. (Fig3)

Re: DS: Property of Number [#permalink]
03 Dec 2010, 10:22

Expert's post

devilmirror wrote:

Is -x < 2y (1) y > -1 (2) (2^x) - 4 > 0

Quite an old thread is resurrected.

Is -x<2y?

Is \(-x<2y\)? --> rearrange: is \(x+2y>0\)?

(1) y>-1, clearly insufficient as no info about \(x\).

(2) (2^x)-4>0 --> \(2^x>2^2\) --> \(x>2\) --> also insufficient as no info about \(y\).

(1)+(2) \(y>-1\), or \(2y>-2\) and \(x>2\) --> add this inequalities (remember, you can only add inequalities when their signs are in the same direction and you can only apply subtraction when their signs are in the opposite directions) --> \(2y+x>-2+2\) --> \(x+2y>0\). Sufficient.

Re: DS: Property of Number [#permalink]
06 Feb 2014, 07:41

Bunuel wrote:

devilmirror wrote:

Is -x < 2y (1) y > -1 (2) (2^x) - 4 > 0

Quite an old thread is resurrected.

Is -x<2y?

Is \(-x<2y\)? --> rearrange: is \(x+2y>0\)?

(1) y>-1, clearly insufficient as no info about \(x\).

(2) (2^x)-4>0 --> \(2^x>2^2\) --> \(x>2\) --> also insufficient as no info about \(y\).

(1)+(2) \(y>-1\), or \(2y>-2\) and \(x>2\) --> add this inequalities (remember, you can only add inequalities when their signs are in the same direction and you can only apply subtraction when their signs are in the opposite directions) --> \(2y+x>-2+2\) --> \(x+2y>0\). Sufficient.

Answer: C.

I chose C.. thats correct.. bt with different approach

bt Bunuel I didnt get this highlighted thing?? How did u do that? _________________

Bole So Nehal.. Sat Siri Akal.. Waheguru ji help me to get 700+ score !

Re: DS: Property of Number [#permalink]
07 Feb 2014, 04:12

Expert's post

sanjoo wrote:

Bunuel wrote:

devilmirror wrote:

Is -x < 2y (1) y > -1 (2) (2^x) - 4 > 0

Quite an old thread is resurrected.

Is -x<2y?

Is \(-x<2y\)? --> rearrange: is \(x+2y>0\)?

(1) y>-1, clearly insufficient as no info about \(x\).

(2) (2^x)-4>0 --> \(2^x>2^2\) --> \(x>2\) --> also insufficient as no info about \(y\).

(1)+(2) \(y>-1\), or \(2y>-2\) and \(x>2\) --> add this inequalities (remember, you can only add inequalities when their signs are in the same direction and you can only apply subtraction when their signs are in the opposite directions) --> \(2y+x>-2+2\) --> \(x+2y>0\). Sufficient.

Answer: C.

I chose C.. thats correct.. bt with different approach

bt Bunuel I didnt get this highlighted thing?? How did u do that?

\(2y+x>-2+2\) --> re-arrange the left hand side as x+2y. As for the right hand side: -2 + 2 = 0. So, we get \(x+2y>0\).

I am not panicking. Nope, Not at all. But I am beginning to wonder what I was thinking when I decided to work full-time and plan my cross-continent relocation...

Over the last week my Facebook wall has been flooded with most positive, almost euphoric emotions: “End of a fantastic school year”, “What a life-changing year it’s been”, “My...