I'm happy to help with this one.

Is (1/x) > y/(y^2+3)

(1) y > 0

(2) x = y

Statement #1: y > 0

That tells us no information about x, so it's not sufficient by itself.

Statement #2: x = y

Let's say x = y = 1. Then the left is 1, the right side is 1/(1^2 + 3) = 1/4, and the left side is bigger.

BUT, if x = y = -1, then the left side is -1, and the right side is -1/4, and --- here's one of the really tricky things about negatives and inequalities --- the "

less negative" number -1/4 is

greater than -1, so the right side is bigger. It may be less confusing to think about that in terms of whole numbers ---- for example, 10 > 5, but -5 > -10: it's better to have $10 in your pocket rather than $5 in your pocket, but it's better to be $5 in debt than $10 in debt. Does that make sense?

You are perfectly right --- y^2 is positive whether y is positive or negative, and therefore the denominator (y^2 + 3) is the same whether y is positive or negative, but what's different are whether the

fractions themselves are negative, and that's what can reverse the order of the inequality.

Without knowing whether x & y are positive and negative, we cannot determine the direction of the inequality. Statement #2 by itself is not sufficient

Combined: y > 0 AND x = y

Now, we are guaranteed that the fractions are both positive, so multiplying by x or y will not reverse the order of the inequality. Because x = y, we have (1/y) > y/(y^2+3). Cross-multiplying, we get y^2 + 3 > y^2, which is always true. Together, the statements are sufficient. Answer choice = C.

Does that make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike

_________________

Mike McGarry

Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)