GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 15 Dec 2019, 05:57 ### 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.  # M18-37

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Expert V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59728

### Show Tags

2
12 00:00

Difficulty:   75% (hard)

Question Stats: 45% (01:28) correct 55% (01:19) wrong based on 192 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

How many distinct prime divisors does a positive integer $$n$$ have?

(1) $$2n$$ has one distinct prime divisor

(2) $$3n$$ has one distinct prime divisor

_________________
Math Expert V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59728

### Show Tags

Official Solution:

(1) $$2n$$ has one distinct prime divisor. Obviously that only prime divisor of $$2n$$ is 2. So, $$2n$$ can be 2, 4, 8, ... Which means that $$n$$ can be 1, 2, 4, ... If $$n=1$$ then it has no prime divisor but if $$n$$ is any other value (2, 4, ...) then it has one prime divisor: 2 itself. Not sufficient.

(2) $$3n$$ has one distinct prime divisor. Basically the same here: the only prime divisor of $$3n$$ must be 3. So, $$3n$$ can be 3, 9, 27, ... Which means that $$n$$ can be 1, 3, 9, ... If $$n=1$$ then it has no prime divisor but if $$n$$ is any other value (3, 9, ...) then it has one prime divisor: 3 itself. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) From above the only possible value of $$n$$ is 1, and 1 has no prime divisor. Sufficient.

_________________
Intern  Joined: 10 Aug 2014
Posts: 48
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34 ### Show Tags

We need to find PRIME divisor. Which means only prime number. If 2n has 1 prime divisor, thus n doesn't have any prime divisor. The same goes for 3n.
Intern  Joined: 26 Jul 2016
Posts: 28
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Tepper '19
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

Bunuel wrote:
Official Solution:

(1) $$2n$$ has one distinct prime divisor. Obviously that only prime divisor of $$2n$$ is 2. So, $$2n$$ can be 2, 4, 8, ... Which means that $$n$$ can be 1, 2, 4, ... If $$n=1$$ then it has no prime divisor but if $$n$$ is any other value (2, 4, ...) then it has one prime divisor: 2 itself. Not sufficient.

(2) $$3n$$ has one distinct prime divisor. Basically the same here: the only prime divisor of $$3n$$ must be 3. So, $$3n$$ can be 3, 9, 27, ... Which means that $$n$$ can be 1, 3, 9, ... If $$n=1$$ then it has no prime divisor but if $$n$$ is any other value (3, 9, ...) then it has one prime divisor: 3 itself. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) From above the only possible value of $$n$$ is 1, and 1 has no prime divisor. Sufficient.

my doubt: we could interpret this from each statement alone that only 1 has no prime divisors & no other number satisfies this condition, then why go further?
Math Expert V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59728

### Show Tags

2
yashrakhiani wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
Official Solution:

(1) $$2n$$ has one distinct prime divisor. Obviously that only prime divisor of $$2n$$ is 2. So, $$2n$$ can be 2, 4, 8, ... Which means that $$n$$ can be 1, 2, 4, ... If $$n=1$$ then it has no prime divisor but if $$n$$ is any other value (2, 4, ...) then it has one prime divisor: 2 itself. Not sufficient.

(2) $$3n$$ has one distinct prime divisor. Basically the same here: the only prime divisor of $$3n$$ must be 3. So, $$3n$$ can be 3, 9, 27, ... Which means that $$n$$ can be 1, 3, 9, ... If $$n=1$$ then it has no prime divisor but if $$n$$ is any other value (3, 9, ...) then it has one prime divisor: 3 itself. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) From above the only possible value of $$n$$ is 1, and 1 has no prime divisor. Sufficient.

my doubt: we could interpret this from each statement alone that only 1 has no prime divisors & no other number satisfies this condition, then why go further?

From each statement n can take more than one value. For example, for (1) n can be can be 1, 2, 4, ... For all these cases 2n has one distinct prime divisor, namely 2.
_________________
Intern  B
Joined: 18 Mar 2018
Posts: 27

### Show Tags

Is this the same as saying
Statement 1: $$2n=2^n$$
Statement 2: $$3n=3^n$$? Re: M18-37   [#permalink] 11 Jul 2019, 14:30
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# M18-37

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel  