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: walker type of problem [#permalink]
01 Oct 2008, 06:59
2
This post received KUDOS
a number that satisfies both requirements can be expressed as n(n+1)/2 and k^2.
Since it is the same number:
n(n+1)/2=k^2 => n(n+1) = 2 * k^2
careful observation reveals that we are looking for a positive integer that can be expressed as a product of two consecutive positive integers and also as double of a perfect square.
quick things to realize: 1. two consecutive positive integers would never have a common factor (except 1 which we can ignore) 2. two consecutive positive integers would have one odd and one even integer 3. odd integer has to be a perfect square 4. 2 is a factor of only the even integer which would cancel out the 2 from the other side of the equation 5. after the factor 2 is taken out of the even integer, it is also a perfect square
now lets start looking for odd perfect squares whose adjacent even integer is double of a perfect square.
1 and 2 - our number is 1 * 2 /2 = 1 9 and 8 - our number is 9 * 8 /2 = 36 25 - reject, 24 or 26 do not satisfy 49 and 50 - our number is 49 * 50 /2 = 1225
Re: walker type of problem [#permalink]
01 Oct 2008, 07:22
aim2010 wrote:
a number that satisfies both requirements can be expressed as n(n+1)/2 and k^2.
Since it is the same number:
n(n+1)/2=k^2 => n(n+1) = 2 * k^2
careful observation reveals that we are looking for a positive integer that can be expressed as a product of two consecutive positive integers and also as double of a perfect square.
quick things to realize: 1. two consecutive positive integers would never have a common factor (except 1 which we can ignore) 2. two consecutive positive integers would have one odd and one even integer 3. odd integer has to be a perfect square 4. 2 is a factor of only the even integer which would cancel out the 2 from the other side of the equation 5. after the factor 2 is taken out of the even integer, it is also a perfect square
now lets start looking for odd perfect squares whose adjacent even integer is double of a perfect square.
1 and 2 - our number is 1 * 2 /2 = 1 9 and 8 - our number is 9 * 8 /2 = 36 25 - reject, 24 or 26 do not satisfy 49 and 50 - our number is 49 * 50 /2 = 1225
for these similar questions, I won't go so far, esp to many calculations, up to 49(!!!), should we just replace the number from the choices and
Re: walker type of problem [#permalink]
01 Oct 2008, 07:50
lylya4 wrote:
for these similar questions, I won't go so far, esp to many calculations, up to 49(!!!), should we just replace the number from the choices and
check n(n+1) = 2 * k^2 if n is integer
it makes sense to a certain extent, though there are two reasons I would not test answer choices: 1. Imagine checking 5 four digit numbers if they are perfect squares and if all of them are, then doubling them and checking their factors to come up with two consecutive integers as two exhaustive factors 2. checking answer choices at times gives me a feeling that maybe i missed something, what if i do a mistake and two choices seem to satisfy.
moreover, for going till 49 we just went till 7 after counting 1, 3 and 5. remember we were looking for odd perfect squares. IMO, its up to each person's choice. bottom line is to not bang your head on something for 4 minutes unless you have a gut feeling that you are going in the right direction.
Re: walker type of problem [#permalink]
01 Oct 2008, 15:25
aim2010 wrote:
lylya4 wrote:
for these similar questions, I won't go so far, esp to many calculations, up to 49(!!!), should we just replace the number from the choices and
check n(n+1) = 2 * k^2 if n is integer
it makes sense to a certain extent, though there are two reasons I would not test answer choices: 1. Imagine checking 5 four digit numbers if they are perfect squares and if all of them are, then doubling them and checking their factors to come up with two consecutive integers as two exhaustive factors 2. checking answer choices at times gives me a feeling that maybe i missed something, what if i do a mistake and two choices seem to satisfy.
moreover, for going till 49 we just went till 7 after counting 1, 3 and 5. remember we were looking for odd perfect squares. IMO, its up to each person's choice. bottom line is to not bang your head on something for 4 minutes unless you have a gut feeling that you are going in the right direction.
i still think its easier to check the choices
remember k^2 = X
So n(n+1) = 2X <=> n^2 + 2n - 2X = 0, you replace X with the answer choice and solve the equation, if n is integer, take X
Re: walker type of problem [#permalink]
01 Oct 2008, 16:38
That seems to be a better approach
lylya4 wrote:
aim2010 wrote:
lylya4 wrote:
for these similar questions, I won't go so far, esp to many calculations, up to 49(!!!), should we just replace the number from the choices and
check n(n+1) = 2 * k^2 if n is integer
it makes sense to a certain extent, though there are two reasons I would not test answer choices: 1. Imagine checking 5 four digit numbers if they are perfect squares and if all of them are, then doubling them and checking their factors to come up with two consecutive integers as two exhaustive factors 2. checking answer choices at times gives me a feeling that maybe i missed something, what if i do a mistake and two choices seem to satisfy.
moreover, for going till 49 we just went till 7 after counting 1, 3 and 5. remember we were looking for odd perfect squares. IMO, its up to each person's choice. bottom line is to not bang your head on something for 4 minutes unless you have a gut feeling that you are going in the right direction.
i still think its easier to check the choices
remember k^2 = X
So n(n+1) = 2X <=> n^2 + 2n - 2X = 0, you replace X with the answer choice and solve the equation, if n is integer, take X
much faster
gmatclubot
Re: walker type of problem
[#permalink]
01 Oct 2008, 16:38