Madhavi1990 wrote:
Is r > s ?
(1) -r + s < 0 = I re arranged the statement, so r < s so sufficient
(2) r < | s | = here there were two cases given the modulus, so insufficient: case 1) r < s 2) -r > s
But I combined 1) + 2) where the common answer was r < s. But A is OA.
Could anyone explain the flaw in my reasoning?
Statement 1 which reads -r + s < 0
Is nothing but -r < -s(when you subtract s from both sides)
When we multiply -1 on both sides, the greater than becomes lesser than (or) lesser than becomes greater than
Therefore, the inequality becomes r>s which alone is sufficient.
These are the options in a GMAT DS question
(A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.
(B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.
(C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.
(D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.
(E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.
C comes into play only when either 1 or 2 is not enough to prove the statement.
Hope that helps!
_________________
You've got what it takes, but it will take everything you've got
Connect with me on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/pushpit-chhajer-19388112a/