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:

the reason is that the only common solution for both will be ab = 1. If, a is zero, b(ab-1) will be -b and nont zero. Similarly, if b = 9, a(ab-1) will be -a and not 0.

If a=b=0 then both statements are correct and if a=b=1 then both statements are correct

Graphically

Think of a and b as x and y. Then if you graphed both equations they would intersect at (0,0) and (1,1). Without additional information there is no way to narrow it down.

Logically and algebraically

The statement "x or y" is true if x is true or y is true (including the possibility of both true) The statement "x and y" is true only if both are true.

{ab=1 or a=0} and {ab=1 or b=} is true if ab=1 but it is also true if a=0 and b=0. Again, without additional information there is no way to narrow it down.

For those of you dividing by a or b, you cannot divide both sides of an equation by a quantity that might be zero. If you do this you will lose solutions.

Why cant we use the below? Not sure where i'm going wrong. I assume that aba = a*b*a

1) a^2*b=a divide both the sides by a a*b=1

2) b^2*a=b divide both the sides by b a*b=1

D ??

i think of it in a different way. if ab=1 there can be two cases a=b=1 or a=1/b.

S1) aba=a -------> with a=b=1 ------> 1x1x1=1 true. -------> with a=1/b---------> (1/b)b(1/b)=1/b -------> (1/b)=(1/b) true. sufficient S2) bab=b -------> with a=b=1 ------> 1x1x1=1 true. -------> with a=1/b---------> b(1/b)b=b --------------> b=b true sufficient Ans should be D

i think of it in a different way. if ab=1 there can be two cases a=b=1 or a=1/b.

S1) aba=a -------> with a=b=1 ------> 1x1x1=1 true. -------> with a=1/b---------> (1/b)b(1/b)=1/b -------> (1/b)=(1/b) true. sufficient S2) bab=b -------> with a=b=1 ------> 1x1x1=1 true. -------> with a=1/b---------> b(1/b)b=b --------------> b=b true sufficient Ans should be D

What you've done above is assumed that the answer to the question is 'yes', and you have then tried to prove that the statements are true. That is backwards. The statements are facts; they cannot be wrong, so you should never be trying to prove that they're true. They are. The question, on the other hand, is a question; you don't know what the answer to the question is without more information, and that's the whole point of Data Sufficiency. You can't just assume the answer to the question is 'yes', because then you're assuming what you should be trying to prove. That's the logical fallacy known as 'begging the question'. It's crucially important to be clear about the approach to DS questions, because if you approach them backwards, you'll answer many DS questions incorrectly, including this one.

Here the answer is E, since even knowing both statements, we might have a=b=1 or a=b=0.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

i think of it in a different way. if ab=1 there can be two cases a=b=1 or a=1/b.

S1) aba=a -------> with a=b=1 ------> 1x1x1=1 true. -------> with a=1/b---------> (1/b)b(1/b)=1/b -------> (1/b)=(1/b) true. sufficient S2) bab=b -------> with a=b=1 ------> 1x1x1=1 true. -------> with a=1/b---------> b(1/b)b=b --------------> b=b true sufficient Ans should be D

What you've done above is assumed that the answer to the question is 'yes', and you have then tried to prove that the statements are true. That is backwards. The statements are facts; they cannot be wrong, so you should never be trying to prove that they're true. They are. The question, on the other hand, is a question; you don't know what the answer to the question is without more information, and that's the whole point of Data Sufficiency. You can't just assume the answer to the question is 'yes', because then you're assuming what you should be trying to prove. That's the logical fallacy known as 'begging the question'. It's crucially important to be clear about the approach to DS questions, because if you approach them backwards, you'll answer many DS questions incorrectly, including this one.

Here the answer is E, since even knowing both statements, we might have a=b=1 or a=b=0.

Yes Ian. I forgot to consider the possibility of a and b being zero. I also admit that the strategy which i applied to solve this problem is wrong and can be disastrous in the GMAT. Having said that i should also mention here that for the first time i solved any DS with this strategy. Many thanks to you sir for making me alert on the right occasion.

There’s something in Pacific North West that you cannot find anywhere else. The atmosphere and scenic nature are next to none, with mountains on one side and ocean on...

This month I got selected by Stanford GSB to be included in “Best & Brightest, Class of 2017” by Poets & Quants. Besides feeling honored for being part of...

Joe Navarro is an ex FBI agent who was a founding member of the FBI’s Behavioural Analysis Program. He was a body language expert who he used his ability to successfully...