It is currently 17 Dec 2017, 00:20

### 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

# If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 29

Kudos [?]: 26 [3], given: 9

Location: London
If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2009, 09:00
3
KUDOS
19
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (00:58) correct 49% (01:14) wrong based on 628 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for some positive integer r?

(1) k is divisible by 2^6.
(2) k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Bunuel on 05 Aug 2012, 00:39, edited 1 time in total.
Edited the question and added the OA.

Kudos [?]: 26 [3], given: 9

Manager
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Posts: 170

Kudos [?]: 29 [2], given: 26

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2009, 11:39
2
KUDOS
s1 is insufficient because k is at least 64 if it is divisible by 2^6. so, k cannot equal to 2, 2^2 (4), 2^3 (8), 2^4 (16), and 2^5 (32). However, it can equal to 2^6, 2^7, 2^8 ....

s2 is sufficient because if k is larger than 1 and cannot divisible by any odd number, then 2 and any power of 2 are the only factors of k. Therefore, k can equal to any power of 2.

Kudos [?]: 29 [2], given: 26

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [7], given: 12715

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2009, 11:54
7
KUDOS
Expert's post
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for some positive integer r?

Given: $$k=integer>1$$, question is $$k=2^r$$.

Basically we are asked to determine whether $$k$$ has only 2 as prime factor in its prime factorization.

(1) k is divisible by 2^6 --> $$2^6*p=k$$, if $$p$$ is a power of 2 then the answer is YES and if $$p$$ is the integer other than 2 in any power (eg 3, 5, 12...) then the answer is NO.

(2) k is not divisible by any odd integers greater then 1. Hence $$k$$ has only power of 2 in its prime factorization. Sufficient.

You can check Gmat Club Math Book link below for quant topics.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [7], given: 12715

Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 29

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 9

Location: London

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2009, 14:54
Bunuel - you rock man!
Kudos!

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 9

Intern
Joined: 28 Sep 2009
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2010, 09:25
(1) k is divisible by 2^6 - NOT SUFFICIENT - I Agree

(2) k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1 - SUFFICIENT - I disagree
This means k is divisible by 2,4,6,8,10,12,14 and so on.
so k can have 2,3,5,7 in its prime factors.

If k can only have 2's or it can have 2's and 3/5/7

So, this is NOT SUFFICIENT.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [3], given: 12715

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2010, 09:38
3
KUDOS
Expert's post
nizam wrote:
(1) k is divisible by 2^6 - NOT SUFFICIENT - I Agree

(2) k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1 - SUFFICIENT - I disagree
This means k is divisible by 2,4,6,8,10,12,14 and so on.
so k can have 2,3,5,7 in its prime factors.

If k can only have 2's or it can have 2's and 3/5/7

So, this is NOT SUFFICIENT.

Also red part in your reasoning is not correct.

Statement (2): $$k$$ is not divisible by any odd integers greater then 1, so how it can be divisible by 6=2*3 or 10=2*5 or 12=4*3 or 14=2*7?

For example if it's divisible by 6 then it would mean that it's divisible by every factor of 6 too, so by 3 as well, but we are told that $$k$$ is not divisible by any odd integers greater then 1 so it can not be divisible by 6. The above statement means that $$k$$ is not divisible by any number which has an odd factor greater than 1, so 2 is only prime factor of $$k$$.

Hope it's clear.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [3], given: 12715

Manager
Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 18

Location: India

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2010, 21:43
Hi Bunuel,

Suppose if $$k=64$$ and $$r=2$$. In such case $$k=2^r$$ does not hold true.

What I was thinking that we must have to get value of r in order to prove this..

Cheers!
_________________

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 18

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [1], given: 12715

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2010, 21:50
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
samark wrote:
Hi Bunuel,

Suppose if $$k=64$$ and $$r=2$$. In such case $$k=2^r$$ does not hold true.

What I was thinking that we must have to get value of r in order to prove this..

Cheers!

I'm not sure I understand your question. If k=64 why it's necessary r to equal to 2?

From (2) we have that the only prime factor of $$k$$ is 2 which means $$k=2^r$$, for some integer $$r\geq{1}$$ --> $$k=64=2^6$$, so in this case $$r=6$$.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [1], given: 12715

Manager
Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 18

Location: India

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2010, 06:46
ok, I got confused in question. Silly mistake.
Thanks!
_________________

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 18

Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 151

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 15

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2010, 09:34
I got B too. The question asks for "some" r. I basically test the next number after 6 from 2^7.

(1) If k is divisible by 2^6, k will also be divisible by an int*2^6. If 2 is that int, then k = 2^7 and r = 7. >> SUFF

(2) If k is not divisible by any odd int > 1, it means that it could be divisible by 2. Then follow same logic as (1). >> SUFF

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 15

Manager
Status: what we want to do, do it as soon as possible
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 107

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 315

Location: Vietnam
WE 1: 5.0

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2010, 23:36
Bunuel wrote:
Given: $$k=integer>1$$, question is $$k=2^r$$.

Basically we are asked to determine whether $$k$$ has only 2 as prime factor in its prime factorization.

(1) $$2^6*p=k$$, if $$p$$ is a power of 2 then the answer is YES and if $$p$$ is the integer other than 2 in any power (eg 3, 5, 12...) then the answer is NO.

You can check Gmat Club Math Book link below for quant topics.

i made some careless mistake as i did not perform some word translation: k = 2^6 * p (p = 3,5,...).
The equalation k = 2^6 * p will help us to see the trap of (1)
_________________

Consider giving me kudos if you find my explanations helpful so i can learn how to express ideas to people more understandable.

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 315

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2013, 00:38
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Bumping for review and further discussion*. Get a kudos point for an alternative solution!

*New project from GMAT Club!!! Check HERE

All DS Divisibility/Multiples/Factors questions to practice: search.php?search_id=tag&tag_id=354
All PS Divisibility/Multiples/Factors questions to practice: search.php?search_id=tag&tag_id=185

_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Intern
Joined: 22 May 2013
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 19 [1], given: 10

Concentration: General Management, Technology
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2013, 06:38
1
KUDOS
arjunrampal wrote:
If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for some positive integer r?

(1) k is divisible by 2^6.
(2) k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1.

Question: Its a YES or NO question.

Either k=2^r or not, we need to get a definite answer thats all, r>0

(1) k is divisible by 2^6.

2^6 * x =k

x could be anything, 1,2,3,4 etc =>Not sufficient

(2) k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1.

well okay, so 3,5,7 etc are all out of the loop, anything that involves odd no's, then that leaves us only even no's to work with.

and even no's are all multiple of 2, so yeah, for some positive r? k=2^r is possible.

Sufficient.

Ans: B
_________________

Kudos [?]: 19 [1], given: 10

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 430

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 488

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2013, 23:47
Question does require some clarification for me.
Lets just focus on B
k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1

I can be sure of only one thing here, that is K is even, or it can be raised to the power of 2.
What is the definite value of K cannot be obtained by statement 2, under any circumstances, I think all of us agree.
e.g, K could be 2, 4, 8,16,32 etc
Now question is
Is k equal to $$2^r$$ for some positive integer r?
If K=2 and r=2,then is $$2 = 2^2$$ answer is No $$2 \neq 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors greater than 1 and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=2 and r=2 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=3,then is $$4 = 2^3$$ answer is No $$4 \neq 8$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors greater than 1 and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=4 and r=3 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=2,then is $$4 = 2^2$$ Answer is Yes $$4 = 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors greater than 1 and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k =4 and r=2 are both valid}
So we can see depending upon r ,$$2^r$$changes .
so we can get both a Yes and a No depending upon K and r, can we not?
We do not have a definite K and a definite r, from 2

If question could have stated does K have only 2 as prime factors then of course solution could be more justified. I think some of us do agree that solution is debatable.
Please do correct, if there is anything wrong with the reasoning above, not entirely confident in challenging solution of GMAT prep.
_________________

- Stne

Last edited by stne on 23 Jul 2013, 00:05, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 488

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2013, 23:59
stne wrote:
Question does require some clarification for me.
Lets just focus on B
k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1

I can be sure of only one thing here, that is K is even, or it can be raised to the power of 2.
What is the definite value of K cannot be obtained by statement 2, under any circumstances, I think all of us agree.
e.g, K could be 2, 4, 8,16,32 etc
Now question is
Is k equal to $$2^r$$ for some positive integer r?
If K=2 and r=2,then is $$2 = 2^2$$ answer is No $$2 \neq 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=2 and r=2 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=3,then is $$4 = 2^3$$ answer is No $$4 \neq 8$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=4 and r=3 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=2,then is $$4 = 2^2$$ Answer is Yes $$4 = 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k =4 and r=2 are both valid}
So we can see depending upon r ,$$2^r$$changes .
so we can get both a Yes and a No depending upon K and r, can we not?
We do not have a definite K and a definite r, from 2

If question could have stated does K have only 2 as prime factors then of course solution could be more justified. I think some of us do agree that solution is debatable.

I think you misunderstood the question.

The question basically asks: can k be written as some power of 2. (2) implies that k is some power of 2, thus it's sufficient.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 430

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 488

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2013, 00:09
Bunuel wrote:
stne wrote:
Question does require some clarification for me.
Lets just focus on B
k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1

I can be sure of only one thing here, that is K is even, or it can be raised to the power of 2.
What is the definite value of K cannot be obtained by statement 2, under any circumstances, I think all of us agree.
e.g, K could be 2, 4, 8,16,32 etc
Now question is
Is k equal to $$2^r$$ for some positive integer r?
If K=2 and r=2,then is $$2 = 2^2$$ answer is No $$2 \neq 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=2 and r=2 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=3,then is $$4 = 2^3$$ answer is No $$4 \neq 8$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=4 and r=3 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=2,then is $$4 = 2^2$$ Answer is Yes $$4 = 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k =4 and r=2 are both valid}
So we can see depending upon r ,$$2^r$$changes .
so we can get both a Yes and a No depending upon K and r, can we not?
We do not have a definite K and a definite r, from 2

If question could have stated does K have only 2 as prime factors then of course solution could be more justified. I think some of us do agree that solution is debatable.

I think you misunderstood the question.

The question basically asks: can k be written as some power of 2. (2) implies that k is some power of 2, thus it's sufficient.

Bunuel question says is $$K = 2^r$$
if K = 4 and r=3 then how is $$4 = 2^3$$

The stress is on " equal to "
_________________

- Stne

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 488

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2013, 00:17
stne wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
stne wrote:
Question does require some clarification for me.
Lets just focus on B
k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1

I can be sure of only one thing here, that is K is even, or it can be raised to the power of 2.
What is the definite value of K cannot be obtained by statement 2, under any circumstances, I think all of us agree.
e.g, K could be 2, 4, 8,16,32 etc
Now question is
Is k equal to $$2^r$$ for some positive integer r?
If K=2 and r=2,then is $$2 = 2^2$$ answer is No $$2 \neq 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=2 and r=2 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=3,then is $$4 = 2^3$$ answer is No $$4 \neq 8$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors and r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k=4 and r=3 are both valid}
If K=4 and r=2,then is $$4 = 2^2$$ Answer is Yes $$4 = 4$$ { there is no restriction on the value of k other than it has no odd factors r has no restriction other than it is an integer, so k =4 and r=2 are both valid}
So we can see depending upon r ,$$2^r$$changes .
so we can get both a Yes and a No depending upon K and r, can we not?
We do not have a definite K and a definite r, from 2

If question could have stated does K have only 2 as prime factors then of course solution could be more justified. I think some of us do agree that solution is debatable.

I think you misunderstood the question.

The question basically asks: can k be written as some power of 2. (2) implies that k is some power of 2, thus it's sufficient.

Bunuel question says is $$K = 2^r$$
if K = 4 and r=3 then how is $$4 = 2^3$$

The stress is on " equal to "

Again, you misinterpret the question.

The question asks whether we can find some positive integer r so that to represent k in form of 2^r. Or to put it simply, the question asks whether the prime factorization of k contain only 2's.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 430

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 488

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2013, 01:04
Again It could have been better if we could not assume "equal to " to mean the same as " if K can be raised to some power of 2"
if question was can k be written as $$2^r$$ - of course solution makes sense
if question was whether the prime factorization of k contain only 2's- of course solution makes sense.

but question is, is $$K = 2^r$$ or is k "equal to" $$2^r$$

Why are we changing the " equal to " in the original question to " can be written as" to suit the OA?
Is $$k=2^r$$ and can k " be written as $$2^r$$ are two very different questions I think.

The language " equal to " is a bit ambiguous here I think.
To make the answer b of course we have to assume "Is K = $$2^r$$" to mean the same as " can K be written as $$2^r$$"

Anyway I get what you mean, I was just hoping that some one could agree that the term " equal to " is a bit ambiguous.
Because if question was "is K = $$2^r$$"

and if K = 2 and r= 3 , $$2 \neq 8$$ , $$2 \neq 2^3$$ $$k \neq 2^r$$
if K=4 and r=2 then, $$4 = 4$$ , $$2 = 2^2$$ $$k= 2^r$$

Without the OA high chance of someone misinterpreting this, I think.
_________________

- Stne

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 488

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42630

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Re: If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2013, 01:06
stne wrote:
Again It could have been better if we could not assume "equal to " to mean the same as " if K can be raised to some power of 2 "
if question was can k be written as $$2^r$$ - of course solution makes sense
if question was whether the prime factorization of k contain only 2's- of course solution makes sense.
but question is, is $$K = 2^r$$ or is k "equal to" $$2^r$$

Why are we changing the " equal to " in the original question to " can be written as" to suit the OA?
Is $$k=2^r$$ and can k " be written as $$2^r$$ are two very different questions I think.

The language " equal to " is a bit ambiguous here I think.
To make the answer b of course we have to assume "Is K = $$2^r$$" to mean the same as " can K be written as $$2^r$$"

Anyway I get what you mean, I was just hoping that some one could agree that the term " equal to " is a bit ambiguous.
Because if question was "is K = $$2^r$$"

and if K = 2 and r= 3 , $$2 \neq 8$$ , $$2 \neq 2^3$$ $$k \neq 2^r$$
if K=4 and r=2 then, $$4 = 4$$ , $$2 = 2^2$$ $$k= 2^r$$

Without the OA high chance of someone misinterpreting this, I think.

It's a GMAT Prep question. The wording is fine.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 135910 [0], given: 12715

Retired Moderator
Joined: 29 Oct 2013
Posts: 285

Kudos [?]: 506 [0], given: 197

Concentration: Finance
GPA: 3.7
WE: Corporate Finance (Retail Banking)
If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for some positive [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2016, 12:03
If k is an integer greater than 1, is k equal to 2^r for some positive integer r?

(1) k is divisible by 2^6

(2) k is not divisible by any odd integer greater than 1
_________________

My journey V46 and 750 -> http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-journey-to-46-on-verbal-750overall-171722.html#p1367876

Last edited by ENGRTOMBA2018 on 16 Jan 2016, 12:09, edited 1 time in total.
Corrected the typo in the question.

Kudos [?]: 506 [0], given: 197

If k is an integer greater than 1, is k wqual to 2^r for some positive   [#permalink] 16 Jan 2016, 12:03

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 27 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by