Last visit was: 20 Jul 2024, 09:29 It is currently 20 Jul 2024, 09:29
Toolkit
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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

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.

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94430
Own Kudos [?]: 642519 [11]
Given Kudos: 86708
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94430
Own Kudos [?]: 642519 [5]
Given Kudos: 86708
General Discussion
VP
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Posts: 1115
Own Kudos [?]: 1300 [1]
Given Kudos: 351
Location: India
Stern School Moderator
Joined: 26 May 2020
Status:Spirited
Posts: 632
Own Kudos [?]: 540 [0]
Given Kudos: 219
Concentration: General Management, Technology
WE:Analyst (Computer Software)
imo D

(1) All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.
ABCD will be square or rectangle , if 4 internal angles are equal .
.. we can confidently say that it will be a parallelogram. Sufficient

(2) AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.

=>
opposite sides are equal and parallel.
So we can confidently say that it is a parallelogram. Sufficient
Retired Moderator
Joined: 28 Feb 2020
Posts: 935
Own Kudos [?]: 494 [0]
Given Kudos: 839
Location: India
WE:Other (Other)

Statement (1): All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.

ABCD will be a square or rectangle, if all the 4 internals angles are equal.
We can say that ABCD is a parallelogram.

The statement is Sufficient.

Statement (2): AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.

Opposite sides are equal and parallel. So, it is a parallelogram.

The statement is Sufficient.

Both Statement are sufficient, therefore the answer is D.
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2019
Posts: 105
Own Kudos [?]: 55 [0]
Given Kudos: 79
Or an isosceles trapezoid.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94430
Own Kudos [?]: 642519 [0]
Given Kudos: 86708
AkashM wrote:
Or an isosceles trapezoid.

No, isosceles trapezoid does not meet any of the statement:

All four internal angles of ABCD are NOT equal and AC does NOT divide ABCD into two congruent triangles.

Attachment:

Untitled.png [ 12.24 KiB | Viewed 5599 times ]
Intern
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]
Given Kudos: 13
Concentration: Finance, Other
Bunuel wrote:

(1) All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.

(2) AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.

Project DS Butler Data Sufficiency (DS3)

For 1) If all angles are equal i.e. each angle is 90 degrees. Hence figure is either a rectangle or a square.

2) as bunnel said, can be a kite or a trapezium with a pair of non parallel sides equal
Intern
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 33
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [1]
Given Kudos: 628
Location: India
devsawla wrote:
Bunuel wrote:

(1) All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.

(2) AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.

Project DS Butler Data Sufficiency (DS3)

For 1) If all angles are equal i.e. each angle is 90 degrees. Hence figure is either a rectangle or a square.

2) as bunnel said, can be a kite or a trapezium with a pair of non parallel sides equal

Hi devsawla,

Bunuel has rightly said. However, you have wrongly interpreted it.
For statement 2 (AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles), a trapezium / trapezoid or an isosceles trapezium / trapezoid will never be a case.

Because if we see the content and figure in the link:

It clearly states that isosceles trapezium / trapezoid (or even a trapezium / trapezoid) does not meet any of the two statements. And we can see that. Please let me know if you are still not clear on this.

The cases that satisfy the requirements for statement 2 are: a kite, a parallelogram, a rhombus, a rectangle and a square. So, Statement 2 alone is not sufficient because of the possibility of a kite case. All other cases (except kite) are a parallelogram.

Hi Bunuel,
Please correct my understanding or if I have interpreted wrongly in this post/reply.

Regards,
Ravish.
Intern
Joined: 23 Jan 2019
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [1]
Given Kudos: 13
Concentration: Finance, Other
1
Kudos
ravish844 wrote:
devsawla wrote:
Bunuel wrote:

(1) All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.

(2) AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.

Project DS Butler Data Sufficiency (DS3)

For 1) If all angles are equal i.e. each angle is 90 degrees. Hence figure is either a rectangle or a square.

2) as bunnel said, can be a kite or a trapezium with a pair of non parallel sides equal

Hi devsawla,

Bunuel has rightly said. However, you have wrongly interpreted it.
For statement 2 (AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles), a trapezium / trapezoid or an isosceles trapezium / trapezoid will never be a case.

Because if we see the content and figure in the link:

It clearly states that isosceles trapezium / trapezoid (or even a trapezium / trapezoid) does not meet any of the two statements. And we can see that. Please let me know if you are still not clear on this.

The cases that satisfy the requirements for statement 2 are: a kite, a parallelogram, a rhombus, a rectangle and a square. So, Statement 2 alone is not sufficient because of the possibility of a kite case. All other cases (except kite) are a parallelogram.

Hi Bunuel,
Please correct my understanding or if I have interpreted wrongly in this post/reply.

Regards,
Ravish.

Thanks for pointing it out.
I do see how I was incorrect

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 33
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [1]
Given Kudos: 628
Location: India
1
Kudos
TarunKumar1234 wrote:
Thanks Bunuel! for correcting it.

Stat1: All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.
if 4 internal angles are equal, then ABCD will be square or rectangle. In both cases, it will be a parallelogram. Sufficient

STat2: AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.
It can be KITE . So, it is a not parallelogram. Not Sufficient

So, I think A.

Hi TarunKumar1234,

You have written for statement 2: "It can be KITE . So, it is a not parallelogram. Not Sufficient".
There are two fundamental flaws here.
The first one: If only a kite satisfies the statement 2 criteria, then only 1 case is possible and it's not a parallelogram. Hence, the statement 2 alone should be sufficient to say that it's not a parallelogram.

However, the cases that satisfy the requirements for statement 2 are: a kite, a parallelogram, a rhombus, a rectangle and a square. So, statement 2 alone is not sufficient because of the possibility of a kite case. All other cases (except kite) are a parallelogram.
So, statement 2: can be a parallelogram or cannot be a parallelogram. Statement 2 alone is not sufficient.

Second flaw is that statement 1 and statement 2 can never contradict each other. Is quadrilateral ABCD a parallelogram?
As per statement 1: Yes, it will be a parallelogram. Statement 1 alone is sufficient to say that quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram.
As per statement 2: (As you have written: "It can be KITE. So, it is a not parallelogram. Not Sufficient" Yes, it will NOTbe a parallelogram. Statement 2 alone is sufficient to say that quadrilateral ABCD is NOT a parallelogram.
Here, statement 1 and statement 2 contradict each other. Hence, some logical flaw or something we missed while solving each statement independently.

Hi Bunuel,
Please correct my understanding or if I have interpreted wrongly in this post/reply.

Regards,
Ravish.
VP
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Posts: 1115
Own Kudos [?]: 1300 [1]
Given Kudos: 351
Location: India
1
Kudos
ravish844 wrote:
TarunKumar1234 wrote:
Thanks Bunuel! for correcting it.

Stat1: All four internal angles of ABCD are equal.
if 4 internal angles are equal, then ABCD will be square or rectangle. In both cases, it will be a parallelogram. Sufficient

STat2: AC, a diagonal of ABCD, divides ABCD into two congruent triangles.
It can be KITE . So, it is a not parallelogram. Not Sufficient

So, I think A.

Hi TarunKumar1234,

You have written for statement 2: "It can be KITE . So, it is a not parallelogram. Not Sufficient".
There are two fundamental flaws here.
The first one: If only a kite satisfies the statement 2 criteria, then only 1 case is possible and it's not a parallelogram. Hence, the statement 2 alone should be sufficient to say that it's not a parallelogram.

However, the cases that satisfy the requirements for statement 2 are: a kite, a parallelogram, a rhombus, a rectangle and a square. So, statement 2 alone is not sufficient because of the possibility of a kite case. All other cases (except kite) are a parallelogram.
So, statement 2: can be a parallelogram or cannot be a parallelogram. Statement 2 alone is not sufficient.

Second flaw is that statement 1 and statement 2 can never contradict each other. Is quadrilateral ABCD a parallelogram?
As per statement 1: Yes, it will be a parallelogram. Statement 1 alone is sufficient to say that quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram.
As per statement 2: (As you have written: "It can be KITE. So, it is a not parallelogram. Not Sufficient" Yes, it will NOTbe a parallelogram. Statement 2 alone is sufficient to say that quadrilateral ABCD is NOT a parallelogram.
Here, statement 1 and statement 2 contradict each other. Hence, some logical flaw or something we missed while solving each statement independently.

Hi Bunuel,
Please correct my understanding or if I have interpreted wrongly in this post/reply.

Regards,
Ravish.

ravish
I mentioned, It can be kite. Hope you observed that Parallelogram is easy to see from Stat2. So, It is not sufficient.
So, stat1 is sufficient. Hope, it is clear.
VP
Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1246
Own Kudos [?]: 208 [1]
Given Kudos: 332
1
Kudos
Bunuel To be clear:

Is this accurate?

-diagonals of a square, rectangle, rhombus, and parallelogram will divide the polygon into two congruent triangles
-square: 45-45-90
-rectangle: variable depending on ratio of sides
-rhombus: 60-60-60 (equilateral)
-parallelogram: What does this get you?
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94430
Own Kudos [?]: 642519 [1]
Given Kudos: 86708
1
Kudos
CEdward wrote:
Bunuel To be clear:

Is this accurate?

-diagonals of a square, rectangle, rhombus, and parallelogram will divide the polygon into two congruent triangles
-square: 45-45-90
-rectangle: variable depending on ratio of sides
-rhombus: 60-60-60 (equilateral)
-parallelogram: What does this get you?

Text in red is not correct. It's true only for a special rhombus which has adjacent interior angles equal to 60° and 120°. The diagonal connecting 120° degree angles divides the rhombus into two equilateral triangles.

As for parallelogram, each diagonal divides the quadrilateral into two congruent triangles.

Attachment:

Untitled.png [ 51.75 KiB | Viewed 4950 times ]
Non-Human User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 34039
Own Kudos [?]: 853 [0]
Given Kudos: 0