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 Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!

Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 500,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club

Registration gives you:

Tests

Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.

Applicant Stats

View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more

Books/Downloads

Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Can someone explain the quickest way to solve this

Let \(A=(x-y)\), then we have :

\(\frac{1}{A} < -A\)

if A>0, then A^2<-1. So no solution if A<0, then A^2>-1. So all A<0 is a solution

Therefore, if we can impose conditions on x,y such that (x-y) is >0, then we know the answer is always "No" conversely if (x-y) < 0 then we know the answer is always "Yes"

(1) not sufficient as it only talks of y (2) not sufficient as it only talks of x

(1)+(2) y positive & x negative means (x-y)<0. So this inequality is always true. SUFFICIENT

(1) y greater than 0 : example 1 : x = 0.5 and y = 0.2 => 1/0.7>-0.3 example 2 : x = 0.2 and y = 0.5 => -1/0.3<0.7 INSUFFICIENT

(2) x less than 0 is the same problem as before ! INSUFFICIENT

(Both) x negative, y positive but whose greater than the other (in absolute value of course)? example 1: x = -2 and y = 3 => 1/(-5) < 1 example 2: x = -3 and y = 2 => 1/(-5) = -0.2 > -1

(Both) x negative, y positive but whose greater than the other (in absolute value of course)? example 1: x = -2 and y = 3 => 1/(-5) < 1 example 2: x = -3 and y = 2 => 1/(-5) = -0.2 > -1

ANS: E.

Hope it is clear

Example 2 is incorrect. RHS is y-x which will be +5 not -1.

Can someone explain the quickest way to solve this

Is \(\frac{1}{x-y}<y - x\)?

(1) y is positive, clearly insufficient, as no info about \(x\); (2) x is negative, also insufficient, as no info about \(y\);

(1)+(2) Since y is positive and x is negative, then \(y>x\). We can re-write this as \(x-y<0\), as well as \(y-x>0\). Evaluate LHS and RHS from the question: \((LHS=\frac{1}{x-y})<0\), and \((RHS=y-x)>0\), therefore \((LHS=negative)<(RHS=positive)\). Sufficient.

Answer: C.

OR: Is \(\frac{1}{x-y}<y - x\) --> is \(\frac{1}{x-y}+x-y<0\) --> is \(\frac{1+(x-y)^2}{x-y}<0\)?

(1) \(y\) is positive, clearly insufficient, as no info about \(x\); (2) \(x\) is negative, also insufficient, as no info about \(y\);

(1)+(2) Is \(\frac{1+(x-y)^2}{x-y}<0\)? Now, nominator in this fraction is always positive (1 plus some non-negative number), but denominator is always negative as \(x-y=negative-positive=negative\) (for example: -3-2=-5).So we would have is \(\frac{positive}{negative}<0\)? Which is true. Sufficient.

Can someone explain the quickest way to solve this

The quickest way to solve this is to note that one side of this inequality is always positive, and the other side is always negative. If x > y, then the left side is positive, and the right side is negative, so this will always be false. On the other hand, if y > x, then the left side is negative, while the right side is positive, so the inequality will always be true.

(1) Tells you nothing about x. Insufficient. (2) Tells you nothing about y. Insufficient. Together: y is positive and x is negative, so y > x, and the inequality is true. Sufficient - (C).

1 / ( x - y) < ( y - x ) -- > 1< (y-x)*(x-y) -- > 1<-x^2+2xy-y^2 -- > the question is -1> x^2-2xy+y^2 ?

With regard to the stmt (1) it follows from -1> x^2-2xy+y^2 that x^2+y^2 is always greater than -2xy for any term of x and y. Hence, x^2-2xy+y^2>-1. Even if x were equal to zero, the result will not change. SUFF.

The same solution, i.e. x^2-2xy+y^2>-1, is true also for the case when x is negative according to stmt (2). Here, again it does not matter whether x and y are positive or negative because x^2+y^2 is always greater than -2xy. Here we do not need to know the term of y, anyway the result will not change. Hence stmt (2) - SUFF. Hence, the ans. is D.

1 / ( x - y) < ( y - x ) -- > 1< (y-x)*(x-y) -- > 1<-x^2+2xy-y^2 -- > the question is -1> x^2-2xy+y^2 ?

With regard to the stmt (1) it follows from -1> x^2-2xy+y^2 that x^2+y^2 is always greater than -2xy for any term of x and y. Hence, x^2-2xy+y^2>-1. Even if x were equal to zero, the result will not change. SUFF.

The same solution, i.e. x^2-2xy+y^2>-1, is true also for the case when x is negative according to stmt (2). Here, again it does not matter whether x and y are positive or negative because x^2+y^2 is always greater than -2xy. Here we do not need to know the term of y, anyway the result will not change. Hence stmt (2) - SUFF. Hence, the ans. is D.

Never multiply (or reduce) an inequality by variable (or by an expression with variable) if you don't know the sign of it.

So you can not multiply 1/(x-y)<(y-x ) by x-y and write 1<(y-x)*(x-y) because you don't know whether x-y is positive or negative: if it's positive then you should write 1<(y-x)*(x-y) but if its negative then you should flip the sign and write 1>(y-x)*(x-y)

OA for this question is C not D, refer to the posts above for a solution.
_________________

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________