It is currently 23 Jun 2017, 09:06

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

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

At the end of every hour a culture of bacteria becomes some

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 17
At the end of every hour a culture of bacteria becomes some [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 09:54
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

This topic is locked. If you want to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum.

At the end of every hour a culture of bacteria becomes some number of times larger than it was the previous hour. If the number of bacteria was originally greater than 1 and if the rate of growth also increases every hour, what was the original number of bacteria?

1) 1/3 of the original culture would have resulted in a total of 385 bacteria after 3 hours.

2) The original number of bacteria was less than 4.

Last edited by acid_burn on 15 Sep 2005, 14:09, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 133
Location: Chicago

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 10:34
Ok, I want to say E. I have feeling this could be wrong, but here is my reasoning. The stem does not give very much information (as some DS problems do). It it not clear whether "some number larger" is the same number each hour. Maybe we can assume this. If so, it doesn't say that that the number of bacteria is an integer. All we know is that the original number is great than one and is increasing every hour

1. Insufficient. X=original amount, Y=amount increased each hour, then we have: XY^3=385. 2 variables that we can't figure out.

2. Insufficient. X<4. Combined with the stem, 1<X<4. Like I said, I'm assuming that the origainal amount is not an integer, so it could be any number between 1 and 4. We still don't know Y.

Together, X can be an infinite amount of numbers, so there is no way to figure out Y. E is my answer.

I have a gut feeling I am missing something important, and that I am wrong.
_________________

Christopher Wilson

Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Oct 2004
Posts: 284

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 10:49
I'm getting to E) too. Same explanation as above - applying geometric mean.
_________________

-Vikram

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 197

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 11:08
Could the opening poster please check the wording of statement 1 please ? It isn't a complete sentence.

We know the rate of growth increases.

The number of bacteria must be an integer.
You can't have half a bacteria.

So X=2 or X=3 under 2.
Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 14

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 12:19
chriswil2005 wrote:
Ok, I want to say E. I have feeling this could be wrong, but here is my reasoning. The stem does not give very much information (as some DS problems do). It it not clear whether "some number larger" is the same number each hour. Maybe we can assume this. If so, it doesn't say that that the number of bacteria is an integer. All we know is that the original number is great than one and is increasing every hour

1. Insufficient. X=original amount, Y=amount increased each hour, then we have: XY^3=385. 2 variables that we can't figure out.

2. Insufficient. X<4. Combined with the stem, 1<X<4. Like I said, I'm assuming that the origainal amount is not an integer, so it could be any number between 1 and 4. We still don't know Y.

Together, X can be an infinite amount of numbers, so there is no way to figure out Y. E is my answer.

I have a gut feeling I am missing something important, and that I am wrong.

Geometric funda wont work here since it is mentioned that the "rate of growth" also increases every hour..Answer anyway should be 'E' only.

Davesh.
Manager
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 162

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 12:37
[quote="acid_burn"]At the end of every hour a culture of bacteria becomes some number of times larger than it was the previous hour. If the number of bacteria was originally greater than 1 and if the rate of growth also increases every hour, what was the original number of bacteria?

1) of the original culture would have resulted in a total of 385 bacteria after 3 hours.

2) The original number of bacteria was less than 4.

I pick E and here is my reasoning:

First consider 1). It tells us after 3 hours, the original number of bacteria grows to 385. And from the question the original number of bacteria is greater than 1 and the rate of growth increases every hour. We can have either the original number of bateria as a small number, (ie. 2 for example) and have the rapid rate of growth to reach 385 after 3 hours or the original number of bacteria as a larger number, (ie. 90 for example) and have the slower rate of growth. So 1) is not sufficient and we eliminate A and D.

Consider 2). It tells us the originial number of bacteria was less than 4. And from the question we know the original number of bacteria is greater than 1. This leaves two possibilites, 2 and 3. Same rational as above, we cannot determine which number is the right one. We eliminate B.

Combining 1) and 2), we still cannot solve the problem we face above, and we eliminate C and the answer is E.

Pls let us know the OA.
Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 197

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 14:02
I still think there is something missing from the opening post.
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 17

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 14:13
Sorry guys, I have missed a number in statement 1. I edited the post so that
everything is included now.

Intern
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 41

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 19:15
i thin i got it.. correct me if i am wrong.

1. statement 1 says 1/3 of the original culture would have resulted....

which means the number must be 3 or multiple of 3 ie, 3,6,9.....

insuff

2. statement 2 says original number of bacteria was less than 4

insuff

but together they come to a result 3 as the original number of bacteria.

is it so simple or i am being too optimistic??
VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1115
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08

Show Tags

15 Sep 2005, 19:32
Same for me
C too

from (1) we know that the number of bacteria is divisible by 3

from (2) that this number is <4

it can only be 3
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 17

Show Tags

18 Sep 2005, 13:04
I like your reasoning guys, the official answer uses similar logic but is more lenghty. they use an equation (1/3x)abc = 385 where x is the number of bacteria and a&b&c are rate of growth.

thus xabc = 1155

1155 has four prime factors : 3,5,7,11, which is unsufficient to tell the original number of bacteria since it can be 3,5,7,11 or 5,3,7,11 or 7,3,5,11 . Each pair gives a number for the bacteria and an increasing growth rate.

From statement two, we know that the original number of bacteria is less than 4. When both are combined only one pair complies - 3,5,7,11 where x=3

18 Sep 2005, 13:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by