BalakumaranP
IMO, it cannot be "not equal" always.
If # is subtraction,
a#(b-c)=a-(b-c)=a-b+c
(a#b)-(a#c)=(a-b)-(a-c)=a-b-a+c=-b+c
a-b+c=-b+c when a=0 and not equal for other values.. So both are insufficient.. Am I missing something here?
If # represents one of the operations +, - and *, is \(a#(b-c)=(a#b)-(a#c)\)
for all numbers \(a\), \(b\) and \(c\).
(1) \(a#1\) is not equal to \(1#a\) for some numbers \(a\).
\(#\) is neither addition (as \(a+1=1+a\)) not multiplication (as \(a*1=1*a\)), so \(#\) is a subtraction. Then \(LHS=a#(b-c)=a-b+c\) and \(RHS=(a#b)-(a#c)=(a-b)-(a-c)=c-b\), so the question becomes "is \(a-b+c=c-b\)
for all numbers \(a\), \(b\) and \(c\)?" --> "is \(a=0\)". So when \(a=0\) (and \(#\) is a subtraction) then \(a#(b-c)=(a#b)-(a#c)\) holds true but not for other values of \(a\), so not
for all numbers \(a\), \(b\) and \(c\). Answer to the question is NO. Sufficient.
(2) \(#\) represents subtraction --> the same as above. Sufficient.
Answer: D.
Hope it's clear.
I don't understand why the answer is not E. if a = 0, then yes, if a is not equal to 0, then no. So not sufficient, as nothing can be said conclusively ...