Author 
Message 
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 772
Location: London

A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2010, 11:19
Question Stats:
60% (01:45) correct 40% (02:23) wrong based on 132 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
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/ Login.
_________________
Math writeups 1) Algebra101 2) Sequences 3) Set combinatorics 4) 3D geometry
My GMAT story
GMAT Club Premium Membership  big benefits and savings




Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 49320

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2010, 11:54
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 \(2^61=63\) 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 \(2^51=31\) 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 6331=32 weights can no longer be measured. Answer: D.
_________________
New to the Math Forum? Please read this: Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread  All You Need for Quant  PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: 12 Rules for Posting!!! Resources: GMAT Math Book  Triangles  Polygons  Coordinate Geometry  Factorials  Circles  Number Theory  Remainders; 8. Overlapping Sets  PDF of Math Book; 10. Remainders  GMAT Prep Software Analysis  SEVEN SAMURAI OF 2012 (BEST DISCUSSIONS)  Tricky questions from previous years.
Collection of Questions: PS: 1. Tough and Tricky questions; 2. Hard questions; 3. Hard questions part 2; 4. Standard deviation; 5. Tough Problem Solving Questions With Solutions; 6. Probability and Combinations Questions With Solutions; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 12 Easy Pieces (or not?); 9 Bakers' Dozen; 10 Algebra set. ,11 Mixed Questions, 12 Fresh Meat DS: 1. DS tough questions; 2. DS tough questions part 2; 3. DS tough questions part 3; 4. DS Standard deviation; 5. Inequalities; 6. 700+ GMAT Data Sufficiency Questions With Explanations; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 The Discreet Charm of the DS; 9 Devil's Dozen!!!; 10 Number Properties set., 11 New DS set.
What are GMAT Club Tests? Extrahard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics




Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 772
Location: London

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2010, 12:02
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)
_________________
Math writeups 1) Algebra101 2) Sequences 3) Set combinatorics 4) 3D geometry
My GMAT story
GMAT Club Premium Membership  big benefits and savings



Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 375

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
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
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 772
Location: London

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
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
_________________
Math writeups 1) Algebra101 2) Sequences 3) Set combinatorics 4) 3D geometry
My GMAT story
GMAT Club Premium Membership  big benefits and savings



Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 299
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
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
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 299
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
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
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 436
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GPA: 3.23

Re: Missing Weights
[#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Dec 2012, 22:31
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? \(6432=32\) 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
Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 188
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Healthcare
GPA: 3.5

Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,
[#permalink]
Show Tags
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. 6331 = 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.



Manager
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 85

Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,
[#permalink]
Show Tags
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



NonHuman User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 8157

Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg,
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Mar 2018, 05:46
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 Books  GMAT Club Tests  Best Prices on GMAT Courses  GMAT Mobile App  Math Resources  Verbal Resources




Re: A scientist has a set of weights {1Kg, 2Kg, 4Kg, 8Kg, 16Kg, &nbs
[#permalink]
07 Mar 2018, 05:46






