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:

The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a [#permalink]

Show Tags

19 Sep 2010, 23:56

2

This post received KUDOS

22

This post was BOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

46% (02:37) correct
54% (01:54) wrong based on 780 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a factor of p. if r is the remainder when p is divided by m, is r>1?

(1) the greatest common factor of m and p is 2 (2) the least common multiple of m and p is 30

-------------------------------------------------------------- A small doubt! Are the concepts GCD,LCM applicable to negative numbers?If so,please explain and tel me why -ve numbers are not considered in the Fact1 of the following problem?

-------------------------------------------------------------- I understood that Fact2 is not sufficient but am not sure about Fact1. If negative numbers are taken,then,for example, GCD(-8,6) is 2 and gives new remainder.Am I going wrong somewhere?

A small doubt!Are the concepts GCD,LCM applicable to negative numbers?If so,please explain and tel me why -ve numbers are not considered in the Fact1 of the following problem?

-------------------------------------------------------------- The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a factor of p. if r is the remainder when p is divided by m, is r>1?

(1) the greatest common factor of m and p is 2 (2) the least common multiple of m and p is 30 --------------------------------------------------------------

I understood that Fact2 is not sufficient but am not sure about Fact1.If negative numbers are taken,then,for example, GCD(-8,6) is 2 and gives new remainder.Am I going wrong somewhere?

(1) This is sufficient. We know gcd(m,p)=2, this means both m & p are even. Let q be the quotient and r the remainder when p is divided by m p = q*m + r Note that r cannot be 0, since if r=0, then m divides p and is therefore a factor of p, which we know is not true Also note r cannot be 1, since if r=1, them q*m (even number) + 1 (odd) is an odd number, which is not possible since we know that p is even Hence r>1.

(2) Not sufficient. eg. m=6,p=15,lcm=30, remainder=3; m=5,p=6,lcm=30, remainder=1

Ans is (A)

Note on negative numbers I am not entirely sure what the doubt above is, but atleast in this question we are given 2<m<p, so neither can be negative. In general when talking about division using negative numbers, there can be two values of r, and we have to decide on definition before hand, so I dont think this something the GMAT can test on. Eg, consider division of 10 by -7. 10 = 1*(-7) + (-3) & 10=2*(-7) + (4). Both -3 and 4 are well defined remainders as both satisfy the condition 0<=Abs(remainder)<Abs(divisor). I have never seen GMAT questions deal with negative divisions & remainders because of this ambiguity. _________________

A small doubt!Are the concepts GCD,LCM applicable to negative numbers?If so,please explain and tel me why -ve numbers are not considered in the Fact1 of the following problem?

-------------------------------------------------------------- The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a factor of p. if r is the remainder when p is divided by m, is r>1?

(1) the greatest common factor of m and p is 2 (2) the least common multiple of m and p is 30 --------------------------------------------------------------

I understood that Fact2 is not sufficient but am not sure about Fact1.If negative numbers are taken,then,for example, GCD(-8,6) is 2 and gives new remainder.Am I going wrong somewhere?

SOME NOTES:

1. GCD and LCM The greatest common divisor (GCD), of two or more non-zero integers, is the largest positive integer that divides the numbers without a remainder.

So GCD can only be positive integer. It should be obvious as greatest factor of two integers can not be negative. For example if -3 is a factor of two integer then 3 is also a factor of these two integers.

The lowest common multiple (LCM), of two integers \(a\) and \(b\) is the smallest positive integer that is a multiple both of \(a\) and of \(b\).

So LCM can only be positive integer. It's also quite obvious as if we don not limit LCM to positive integer then LCM won't make sense any more. For example what would be the lowest common multiple of 2 and 3 if LCM could be negative? There is no answer to this question.

2. DIVISIBILITY QUESTIONS ON GMAT

EVERY GMAT divisibility question will tell you in advance that any unknowns represent positive integers.

3. REMAINDER

GMAT Prep definition of the remainder: If \(a\) and \(d\) are positive integers, there exists unique integers \(q\) and \(r\), such that \(a = qd + r\) and \(0\leq{r}<d\). \(q\) is called a quotient and \(r\) is called a remainder.

Moreover many GMAT books say factor is a "positive divisor", \(d>0\).

I've never seen GMAT question asking the remainder when dividend (\(a\)) is negative, but if we'll cancel this restriction (and consider \(dividend=a<0\)), but leave the other restriction (\(0\leq{r}<d\)), then division of negative integer by positive integer could be calculated as follow:

\(-8\) divided by \(6\) will result: \(0\leq{r}<d\), \(a=qd + r\) --> \(0\leq{r}<6\), \(-8=(-2)*6+4\). Hence \(remainder=r=4\).

TO SUMMARIZE, DON'T WORRY ABOUT NEGATIVE DIVIDENDS, DIVISORS OR REMAINDERS ON GMAT.

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION:

The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a factor of p. if r is the remainder when p is divided by m, is r>1?

Given: \(2<m<p\) and \(\frac{p}{m}\neq{integer}\), which means that \(r>0\). Note here that as \(0<2<m<p\) then your example of -8 and 6 is not valid as both \(m\) and \(p\) are positive. Question: \(r=?\)

(1) the greatest common factor of m and p is 2 --> both \(p\) and \(m\) are even (as both have 2 as a factor) --> even divided by even can give only even remainder (0, 2, 4, ...), since remainder is not zero (as \(\frac{p}{m}\neq{integer}\)), then remainder must be more than 1: 2, 4, ... Sufficient.

(2) the least common multiple of m and p is 30 --> if \(m=5\) and \(p=6\), remainder=1=1, answer to the question would be NO. BUT if \(m=10\) and \(p=15\) remainder=5>1 answer to the question would be YES. Two different answers. Not sufficient.

When evaluating statement (2) LCD = 30, is there a way to get the conclusion of insufficient by looking at the prime factors of 30 rather than sub-ing in numbers?

When evaluating statement (2) LCD = 30, is there a way to get the conclusion of insufficient by looking at the prime factors of 30 rather than sub-ing in numbers?

Its one and the same thing. You are looking for 2 factors of 30, such that one is a multiple of the other OR p=km+1 and at the same time their LCM is 30.
_________________

Re: The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 Jun 2013, 22:17

1

This post received KUDOS

ravitejapandiri wrote:

The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a factor of p. if r is the remainder when p is divided by m, is r>1?

(1) the greatest common factor of m and p is 2 (2) the least common multiple of m and p is 30

(1) from this statement we know that both m and n are even integers, whenever we divide even integers to each other the remainder will be 0 or more than 1. However since m and n must be greater than 2 and the greatest common factor is 2, each integer contains some distinct from each other factors. For example, 4(2*2) and 6(3*2), 6(3*2) and 8(2*2*2). So the remainder will be greater than 1 in any case. Sufficient.

(2) here we can have several integers that fit into the 2nd statement's condition and have different remainders. For example, 5 and 6, their LCM is 30 the remainder is 1; and 15 and 6, their LCM is again 30 but the remainder is greater than 1. Not sufficient.
_________________

If you found my post useful and/or interesting - you are welcome to give kudos!

Re: The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a [#permalink]

Show Tags

30 Apr 2015, 06:06

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.
_________________

Re: The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Feb 2016, 06:57

Sorry, just checking. Is statement 1 not asking if the two numbers are not consecutive (as R>1). Then the first statement is stating that the GCF is 2 (for consecutive integers this is always 1) - hence suff. For statement two, mp is 30 - this could be 15 *2 but also 6*5 which are consecutive - hence not sufficient.. Where (all) am I going wrong..

Re: The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 May 2016, 12:17

ravitejapandiri wrote:

The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a factor of p. if r is the remainder when p is divided by m, is r>1?

(1) the greatest common factor of m and p is 2 (2) the least common multiple of m and p is 30

-------------------------------------------------------------- A small doubt! Are the concepts GCD,LCM applicable to negative numbers?If so,please explain and tel me why -ve numbers are not considered in the Fact1 of the following problem?

-------------------------------------------------------------- I understood that Fact2 is not sufficient but am not sure about Fact1. If negative numbers are taken,then,for example, GCD(-8,6) is 2 and gives new remainder.Am I going wrong somewhere?

1. If r=1, that means that p=m+1, so we can try and get a definite answer for p=m+1, if not, then r>1.

St1. - If p=m+1, that means that GCD(M,P)=1, since this is not the case, p is does not equal to m+1, and hence r>1. Hence, St1 sufficient.

St2. - LCM(P,M)=30 -> means: 1. all the distinct prime numbers are: 2,3,5. 2. since this is LCM, the max power of every prime mentioned above is 1. hence 2^1,3^1,5^1. - Now since 2<m<p, we can deduce that either m or p is prime. - case 1: m= 5 ; p= 2*3 -> p=m+1 - case 2: m=3; p=2*5=10 -> p is not equal to m+1. hence St2 is not sufficient.

Final answer: A.

gmatclubot

Re: The integers m and p are such that 2<m<p, and m is not a
[#permalink]
14 May 2016, 12:17

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...

Happy 2017! Here is another update, 7 months later. With this pace I might add only one more post before the end of the GSB! However, I promised that...

The words of John O’Donohue ring in my head every time I reflect on the transformative, euphoric, life-changing, demanding, emotional, and great year that 2016 was! The fourth to...