Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
20 Sep 2009, 19:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
N
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
I believe the correct answer is D.
Basically, in order for xy to be divisible by 3, x or y HAVE TO be divisible by 3 on their own, since 3 is a prime number.
Statement 1: y = 2^(16) - 1:
The key here is knowing that 2^(odd integer) = 3n + 2, and 2^(even integer) = 3n + 1 (where n is a non-negative integer). Since 16 is an even integer, 2^16 will be equal to 3n + 1. Therefore 2^16 - 1 = 3n + 1 - 1 = 3n. Therefore y is divisible by 3, and Statement 1 is sufficient.
The reason that this rule works for 2^n when considering divisibility by 3 is as follows (sorry if this is confusing): if you take a number in the form of 3n + 1, and multiply it by 2, you get 6n + 2, which can be rewritten in the form 2*3n + 2 = 3m + 2. Multiplied again by 2, you get 6m + 4, which can be rewritten in the form 6(m+1) + 1 = 3p + 1. The number 2 (being 2^1) is in the form 3n + 2. Subsequently all numbers in the form 2^(odd number) can be written as 3n + 2, and all numbers in the form 2^(even number) can be written as 3n + 1. I remember learning this somewhere years ago, there might be a better explanation out there on the internet.
Statement 2: The sum of the digits of x equals 6^k :
For x to be divisible by 3, the sum of its digits must also be divisible by 3. It is given that the sum of the digits of x equals 6^k.
\(6^k = 3^k*2^k\) and therefore x is definitely divisible by 3. Therefore Statement 2 is also sufficient.
Since both Statement 1 and 2 are both sufficient by themselves, the correct answer is D.
Basically, in order for xy to be divisible by 3, x or y HAVE TO be divisible by 3 on their own, since 3 is a prime number.
Statement 1: y = 2^(16) - 1:
The key here is knowing that 2^(odd integer) = 3n + 2, and 2^(even integer) = 3n + 1 (where n is a non-negative integer). Since 16 is an even integer, 2^16 will be equal to 3n + 1. Therefore 2^16 - 1 = 3n + 1 - 1 = 3n. Therefore y is divisible by 3, and Statement 1 is sufficient.
The reason that this rule works for 2^n when considering divisibility by 3 is as follows (sorry if this is confusing): if you take a number in the form of 3n + 1, and multiply it by 2, you get 6n + 2, which can be rewritten in the form 2*3n + 2 = 3m + 2. Multiplied again by 2, you get 6m + 4, which can be rewritten in the form 6(m+1) + 1 = 3p + 1. The number 2 (being 2^1) is in the form 3n + 2. Subsequently all numbers in the form 2^(odd number) can be written as 3n + 2, and all numbers in the form 2^(even number) can be written as 3n + 1. I remember learning this somewhere years ago, there might be a better explanation out there on the internet.
Statement 2: The sum of the digits of x equals 6^k :
For x to be divisible by 3, the sum of its digits must also be divisible by 3. It is given that the sum of the digits of x equals 6^k.
\(6^k = 3^k*2^k\) and therefore x is definitely divisible by 3. Therefore Statement 2 is also sufficient.
Since both Statement 1 and 2 are both sufficient by themselves, the correct answer is D.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Data Sufficiency (DS) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
21 Sep 2009, 09:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
What if k=0, then Sum digits of x =1, insuff
OA: A
OA: A
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Data Sufficiency (DS) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
