Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

It is currently 19 Jul 2019, 14:36

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 755
Location: London
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 11:19
4
8
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

53% (02:47) correct 47% (02:44) wrong based on 107 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics


A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg}. This set is good enough to weight any object having an integral weight betweem 1Kg and 63Kg (Eg. 19Kg = 16Kg + 2Kg + 1Kg). If the 4Kg weight is lost, how many weights between 1Kg & 63Kg can no longer be measured ?

A) 16
B) 24
C) 28
D) 32
E) 36

_________________
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 56300
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 11:54
9
4
shrouded1 wrote:
Here is an interesting question :

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg}. This set is good enough to weight any object having an integral weight betweem 1Kg and 63Kg (Eg. 19Kg = 16Kg + 2Kg + 1Kg). If the 4Kg weight is lost, how many weights between 1Kg & 63Kg can no longer be measured ?

A) 16
B) 24
C) 28
D) 32
E) 36


Consider the following example: how many different selections are possible from \(n\) people (including a subset with 0 members and a subset with all \(n\) members)?

\(C^0_n+C^1_n+C^2_n+...+C^n_n=2^n\) --> so, number of different subsets from a set with \(n\) different terms is \(2^n\) (this include one empty subset). Or another way: each person has 2 choices, either to be included or not to be included in the subset, so # of total subsets is \(2^n\).

Next, from a set {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg} obviously no term can be obtained by adding any number of other terms.

So, from a set with 6 different terms {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg} we can form \(2^6-1=63\) subsets each of which will have different sum (minus one empty subset) --> we can weight 63 different weights;

From a set with 5 different terms {1Kg, 2Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg} we can form \(2^5-1=31\) subsets each of which will have different sum (minus one empty subset) --> we can weight 31 different weights;

Which means that if 4Kg weight is lost 63-31=32 weights can no longer be measured.

Answer: D.
_________________
General Discussion
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 755
Location: London
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 12:02
1
1
Good solution, alluding to a binary notation of a number.

Here is another way to think of the problem :

We can form :
1 {1}
2 {2}
3 {1,2}
But we cannot form any of 4 through to 7 without a 4.
So 4 numbers we cannot form up till 7

Next look at the next set of numbers from 8 to 15
Notice that this is set is nothing but :
8+{0,1,2,3,..,7}
But we know from this that we cannot form a 4,5,6,7
So if we count up till 15, there are 2x4=8 numbers in all that we cannot form

Next look at the numbers from 16 to 31
Same patter repeats
This is 16+{0,1,2,...,15}
And we know from 0,..,15 there are 8 numbers we cannot form.
So from 16 to 31 there are 8 more ... hence 2x8=16 numbers between 1 and 31

and this patter goes on ...

For numbers upto 63, it will be 2x16=32

Answer is (d)
_________________
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 315
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 12:37
Both the solution mentioned above are good,

Is there any quicker way to deal with this.
_________________
GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 755
Location: London
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 17:37
There is one more way to do this, but that involves knowledge of a binary notation of a number (a concept not tested on the GMAT). Here is the solution :

In binary a number <=63 can be represented in 6 digits.
Of this 4 represents the 3rd digit from the right.
The number of 6 digit binary numbers possible forcing the 3rd digit to be 1 (all the numbers that need 4) is exactly 2^5 or 32
_________________
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 274
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 20:19
shrouded1 wrote:
Good solution, alluding to a binary notation of a number.

Here is another way to think of the problem :

We can form :
1 {1}
2 {2}
3 {1,2}
But we cannot form any of 4 through to 7 without a 4.
So 4 numbers we cannot form up till 7

Next look at the next set of numbers from 8 to 15
Notice that this is set is nothing but :
8+{0,1,2,3,..,7}
But we know from this that we cannot form a 4,5,6,7
So if we count up till 15, there are 2x4=8 numbers in all that we cannot form

Next look at the numbers from 16 to 31
Same patter repeats
This is 16+{0,1,2,...,15}
And we know from 0,..,15 there are 8 numbers we cannot form.
So from 16 to 31 there are 8 more ... hence 2x8=16 numbers between 1 and 31

and this patter goes on ...

For numbers upto 63, it will be 2x16=32

Answer is (d)


I was doing it this way ... however, lost trach somewhere in the middle. Realize that rather than doing all the way from 1 - 63 in one go, it is better to take it in batches. Thanks.
_________________
All things are possible to those who believe.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 274
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2010, 20:20
onedayill wrote:
Both the solution mentioned above are good,

Is there any quicker way to deal with this.


Bunuel's method is faster, but needs slightly more undertstanding.
_________________
All things are possible to those who believe.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 415
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GPA: 3.23
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Missing Weights  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Dec 2012, 22:31
3
1
shrouded1 wrote:
Here is an interesting question :

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, 32Kg}. This set is good enough to weight any object having an integral weight betweem 1Kg and 63Kg (Eg. 19Kg = 16Kg + 2Kg + 1Kg). If the 4Kg weight is lost, how many weights between 1Kg & 63Kg can no longer be measured ?

A) 16
B) 24
C) 28
D) 32
E) 36


Originally there could be \(2*2*2*2*2*2=2^6=64\) combinations of weight. Now that we took 1 weight off, we get \(2*2*2*2*2=2^5=32\) combinations of weight.

What is lost? \(64-32=32\)

Answer: D

In case you are wondering why 2 was multiplied n times, it's because 2 represents two things: BEING SELECTED and NOT BEING SELECTED.
_________________
Impossible is nothing to God.
Current Student
avatar
B
Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 186
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Healthcare
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.5
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 May 2016, 10:00
Here's how I thought about it: For each weight, there are two possibilities; either it's included or it's not. So, for 6 weights, there are (2*2*2*2*2*2) = 2^6 possibilities, minus 1 (the case where there are no weights) or 63 possibilities. Therefore, if we take away one of the weights, there are now 2^5 - 1 = 31 possibilities. 63-31 = 32.

Answer: D

Aside: Think about it similiarly to how you think about counting the total number of factors from a number's prime factorization: Either the factor is included or it's not.
Current Student
avatar
B
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 81
Schools: HKU MBA"19 (A)
Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 May 2016, 10:16
the first thought i had was 5c0 +5c1 + 5c2 + 5c3 +5c4 +5c5 = 32. This is because i need to choose a 4 and that can be selected in the following combinations. with each one. on solving it gives me 32. 32 sets will be lost.
Hope this helps
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 11709
Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jun 2019, 10:16
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.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,   [#permalink] 22 Jun 2019, 10:16
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne