GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 16 Dec 2018, 02:40

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
Events & Promotions in December
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2526272829301
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
303112345
Open Detailed Calendar
  • FREE Quant Workshop by e-GMAT!

     December 16, 2018

     December 16, 2018

     07:00 AM PST

     09:00 AM PST

    Get personalized insights on how to achieve your Target Quant Score.
  • Free GMAT Prep Hour

     December 16, 2018

     December 16, 2018

     03:00 PM EST

     04:00 PM EST

    Strategies and techniques for approaching featured GMAT topics

A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th

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

Hide Tags

Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 51223
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jun 2018, 22:58
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

71% (01:44) correct 29% (02:02) wrong based on 370 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a thousand years was recently claimed to be that of a much younger tree. In order to rebut this charge, the craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old. Dendrochronology, or the technique of using tree rings to date wood, is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring, as seen in a horizontal cross-section of the trunk. Given that dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years, the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.

Which of the following is an assumption that the argument makes?


A. The artist has not used the trunk of the same tree in other works of art he has produced.

B. The tree was not less than 1,000 years old when it was cut down.

C. The artist worked on the wood consistently, without taking breaks of more than one year.

D. The wood used in the table is large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings.

E. Dendrochronology has shown to be inaccurate for the oldest trees in the world, since parts of the trunks are so worn down that traces of tree rings are difficult to discern.

_________________

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?
Extra-hard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 127
Location: India
Schools: ISB '20
GMAT ToolKit User
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 30 Jun 2018, 23:30
Bunuel wrote:
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a thousand years was recently claimed to be that of a much younger tree. In order to rebut this charge, the craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old. Dendrochronology, or the technique of using tree rings to date wood, is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring, as seen in a horizontal cross-section of the trunk. Given that dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years, the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.

Which of the following is an assumption that the argument makes?


A. The artist has not used the trunk of the same tree in other works of art he has produced.

B. The tree was not less than 1,000 years old when it was cut down.

C. The artist worked on the wood consistently, without taking breaks of more than one year.

D. The wood used in the table is large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings.

E. Dendrochronology has shown to be inaccurate for the oldest trees in the world, since parts of the trunks are so worn down that traces of tree rings are difficult to discern.


IMo A, as if this is negated then the dendrochronologists will not be able to measure accurately the number of rings and would result is a erroneous age

from below discussion i got i was wrong , learned to read the question more carefully,

editing the post so that it might not confuse others , correct answer is D
_________________

If this post helped you learn something pls give kudos


Originally posted by doomedcat on 26 Jun 2018, 23:24.
Last edited by doomedcat on 30 Jun 2018, 23:30, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Oct 2015
Posts: 241
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2018, 01:36
conclusion is that they will be able to determine whether it is more than or less than 1000 years old.

For thuis, we need D to be true. On negating, even if the tree were more than 1000 years old, they would not be able to confirm this as the table itself is not thick enough
BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
P
Joined: 05 Jul 2017
Posts: 491
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
CAT Tests
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2018, 02:00
Quote:
is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring


Quote:
the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.


It will only be possible for dendrochronologists to determine the above only if the table has 1000 tree rings. If the table doesn't have 1000 tree ring, then the entire argument fails.

Answer is D
_________________

My journey From 410 to 700 :-)
Here's my experience when I faced a glitch in my GMAT Exam
Don't do this mistake when you give your GMATPrep Mock!
NEW GMATPrep software analysis by Bunuel

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Feb 2018
Posts: 36
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2018, 02:39
The dendrochronologists can only be able to date the table precisely if all the rings in the tree trunk are a part of the table, or else they wont be able to date the table precisely. Hence they assume that the table is large enough to accommodate all the rings.

The answer is D
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2128
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2018, 07:38
1
1
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a thousand years was recently claimed to be that of a much younger tree. In order to rebut this charge, the craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old. Dendrochronology, or the technique of using tree rings to date wood, is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring, as seen in a horizontal cross-section of the trunk. Given that dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years, the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.

Boil it down - The dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.
Type - Assumption

A. The artist has not used the trunk of the same tree in other works of art he has produced. - Irrelevant -- it does not make a difference even if the artist used the trunk in other works

B. The tree was not less than 1,000 years old when it was cut down. - Incorrect --Our conclusion is NOT whether the tree is at least 1000 years old but whether the dendrochronologists will be able to determine the age

C. The artist worked on the wood consistently, without taking breaks of more than one year. -- Irrelevant-- Even if the artist took some breaks, it does not affect

D. The wood used in the table is large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings. -- Correct -- Negate this and the argument falls apart ; If the table used wasn't large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings, the dendrochronologists won't be able to determine the same

E. Dendrochronology has shown to be inaccurate for the oldest trees in the world, since parts of the trunks are so worn down that traces of tree rings are difficult to discern.-- Irrelevant - the dendrochronologists need to determine whether the tree lived to be at least 1000 years

Answer D
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 2
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2018, 00:38
Skywalker18 wrote:
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a thousand years was recently claimed to be that of a much younger tree. In order to rebut this charge, the craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old. Dendrochronology, or the technique of using tree rings to date wood, is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring, as seen in a horizontal cross-section of the trunk. Given that dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years, the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.

Boil it down - The dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.
Type - Assumption

A. The artist has not used the trunk of the same tree in other works of art he has produced. - Irrelevant -- it does not make a difference even if the artist used the trunk in other works

B. The tree was not less than 1,000 years old when it was cut down. - Incorrect --Our conclusion is NOT whether the tree is at least 1000 years old but whether the dendrochronologists will be able to determine the age

C. The artist worked on the wood consistently, without taking breaks of more than one year. -- Irrelevant-- Even if the artist took some breaks, it does not affect

D. The wood used in the table is large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings. -- Correct -- Negate this and the argument falls apart ; If the table used wasn't large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings, the dendrochronologists won't be able to determine the same

E. Dendrochronology has shown to be inaccurate for the oldest trees in the world, since parts of the trunks are so worn down that traces of tree rings are difficult to discern.-- Irrelevant - the dendrochronologists need to determine whether the tree lived to be at least 1000 years

Answer D


Trying to understand option B- dendrochronologists gonna check the table, although not clearly mentioned, to determine whether age of the tree is greater than 1000 and if the trunk, used for table, had been cut long ago then anyway the test is not going to be successful. So option B should be Winner in that case.

Posted from my mobile device
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2128
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2018, 01:18
tamal099 wrote:
Skywalker18 wrote:
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a thousand years was recently claimed to be that of a much younger tree. In order to rebut this charge, the craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old. Dendrochronology, or the technique of using tree rings to date wood, is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring, as seen in a horizontal cross-section of the trunk. Given that dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years, the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.

Boil it down - The dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.
Type - Assumption

A. The artist has not used the trunk of the same tree in other works of art he has produced. - Irrelevant -- it does not make a difference even if the artist used the trunk in other works

B. The tree was not less than 1,000 years old when it was cut down. - Incorrect --Our conclusion is NOT whether the tree is at least 1000 years old but whether the dendrochronologists will be able to determine the age

C. The artist worked on the wood consistently, without taking breaks of more than one year. -- Irrelevant-- Even if the artist took some breaks, it does not affect

D. The wood used in the table is large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings. -- Correct -- Negate this and the argument falls apart ; If the table used wasn't large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings, the dendrochronologists won't be able to determine the same

E. Dendrochronology has shown to be inaccurate for the oldest trees in the world, since parts of the trunks are so worn down that traces of tree rings are difficult to discern.-- Irrelevant - the dendrochronologists need to determine whether the tree lived to be at least 1000 years

Answer D


Trying to understand option B- dendrochronologists gonna check the table, although not clearly mentioned, to determine whether age of the tree is greater than 1000 and if the trunk, used for table, had been cut long ago then anyway the test is not going to be successful. So option B should be Winner in that case.

Posted from my mobile device


Hi tamal099,

Even if the tree was cut long ago , the dendrochronologists should be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old (Since dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years)

But what if only a part of horizontal cross section of the trunk was used in making the table ? If this is true, then dendrochronologists WON'T be able to determine the age .

Hope this helps! :-)
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 01 Jan 2018
Posts: 123
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2018, 01:38
Skywalker18 wrote:
tamal099 wrote:
Skywalker18 wrote:
A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a thousand years was recently claimed to be that of a much younger tree. In order to rebut this charge, the craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old. Dendrochronology, or the technique of using tree rings to date wood, is based on the fact that for each passing year a tree develops exactly one ring, as seen in a horizontal cross-section of the trunk. Given that dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years, the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.

Boil it down - The dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.
Type - Assumption

A. The artist has not used the trunk of the same tree in other works of art he has produced. - Irrelevant -- it does not make a difference even if the artist used the trunk in other works

B. The tree was not less than 1,000 years old when it was cut down. - Incorrect --Our conclusion is NOT whether the tree is at least 1000 years old but whether the dendrochronologists will be able to determine the age

C. The artist worked on the wood consistently, without taking breaks of more than one year. -- Irrelevant-- Even if the artist took some breaks, it does not affect

D. The wood used in the table is large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings. -- Correct -- Negate this and the argument falls apart ; If the table used wasn't large enough to contain a span of one thousand tree rings, the dendrochronologists won't be able to determine the same

E. Dendrochronology has shown to be inaccurate for the oldest trees in the world, since parts of the trunks are so worn down that traces of tree rings are difficult to discern.-- Irrelevant - the dendrochronologists need to determine whether the tree lived to be at least 1000 years

Answer D


Trying to understand option B- dendrochronologists gonna check the table, although not clearly mentioned, to determine whether age of the tree is greater than 1000 and if the trunk, used for table, had been cut long ago then anyway the test is not going to be successful. So option B should be Winner in that case.

Posted from my mobile device


Hi tamal099,

Even if the tree was cut long ago , the dendrochronologists should be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old (Since dendrochronology is accurate for trees that lived less than 2,000 total years)

But what if only a part of horizontal cross section of the trunk was used in making the table ? If this is true, then dendrochronologists WON'T be able to determine the age .

Hope this helps! :-)


Hi Skywalker18,
See.......craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old, not the wood used for table.

Now....suppose present age of the tree is 1002 years but the trunk , used for table, was cut 50 years ago...then how could dendrochronologists calculate the age of the tree by checking the table ???
Bu checking the table dendrochronologists would say the age of the tree is (1002-50)= 952 yrs, which is clearly wrong.
_________________

kudos please if it helped you.

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2128
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2018, 01:52
1
tamal99 wrote:
See.......craftsman summoned a team of dendrochronologists to prove that the tree lived to be at least to 1,000 years old, not the wood used for table.

Now....suppose present age of the tree is 1002 years but the trunk , used for table, was cut 50 years ago...then how could dendrochronologists calculate the age of the tree by checking the table ???
Bu checking the table dendrochronologists would say the age of the tree is (1002-50)= 952 yrs, which is clearly wrong.


Hi tamal99,
The conclusion is the dendrochronologists will be able to determine whether the work comes from a tree that lived to be at least 1,000 years old.
and NOT the tree is at least 1000 years old.
- Also, once a trunk of tree is cut , newer rings won't be added.

Hope this helps! :-)
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 01 Jan 2018
Posts: 123
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2018, 01:59
Hm....I was thinking in a wrong direction....thanks Skywalker18. :)

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

kudos please if it helped you.

SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1558
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Aug 2018, 18:01
1

Official Explanation


Premise #1: The number of rings on a tree determines the age of the tree

Premise #2: Using this fact, tree experts will be able to determine the age of the table.

Assumption: The table has to come from a cut of wood that actually has 1,000 rings. If the table comes from only a slice of wood, then it won’t contain all 1,000 rings. Remember, according to the prompt, the rings are contained in a horizontal cross section of the trunk. So if the width of the trunk is greater than the length of the table, then we cannot say for sure whether the wood used in table comes from a tree that is at least 1,000 years old.

This logic matches best with answer (D).



(A) is completely irrelevant since we are talking about other works of his. The only work that is in question is the table.

(B) is really misleading. The conclusion is that the tree experts can determine (yes/no) whether the tree is at least 1,000 years. If we negate the assumption in (B), the tree was less than 1,000 years old, then the tree experts will be able to definitively determine the tree’s age. That is consistent with the conclusion. Negating an assumption should result in the argument falling apart. That happens with (D), since if the table is not large enough to contain all the tree rings, then the experts won’t be able to determine whether the tree was at least 1,000 years old.

(C) doesn’t relate to the age of the tree.

(D) See above.

(E) is consistent with the prompt: dendrochronology is accurate only for trees less than 2,000 years old.
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood

GMAT Club Bot
Re: A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th &nbs [#permalink] 15 Aug 2018, 18:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A table made entirely from the trunk of a tree said to have lived a th

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.