Last visit was: 05 Jun 2026, 14:26 It is currently 05 Jun 2026, 14:26
Close
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
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 05 Jun 2026
Posts: 111,115
Own Kudos:
818,971
 [1]
Given Kudos: 106,689
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 111,115
Kudos: 818,971
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 05 Jun 2026
Posts: 111,115
Own Kudos:
818,971
 [1]
Given Kudos: 106,689
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 111,115
Kudos: 818,971
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
RicharddelPino
Joined: 30 Sep 2024
Last visit: 30 Apr 2026
Posts: 19
Own Kudos:
2
 [1]
Posts: 19
Kudos: 2
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
magnamut
Joined: 03 Oct 2025
Last visit: 04 Apr 2026
Posts: 1
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 1
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Bunuel , could you please explain why we took 500/124 and not (500-124)/124? Also, could you elaborate on when we should be taking a/b vs a-b/b

Thank you
Bunuel
Official Solution:

According to the new estimates, the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy has increased from 124 billion to 415 billion, while the number of stars in the Andromeda galaxy has doubled. With these updated figures, the number of stars in the Milky Way is still only 42% of the number of stars in the Andromeda galaxy. Prior to the new estimates, approximately how many times more stars did the Andromeda galaxy have compared to the Milky Way galaxy?

A. 2
B. 4
C. 5
D. 8
E. 16


We are tasked with approximating, so let's proceed with that approach.

Consider using 400 billion instead of 415 billion, and 40% instead of 42%. This gives us: 400 billion = 0.4*(Andromeda's new estimate). Notice that the first approximation decreases the new estimate for the Andromeda galaxy, while the second approximation increases it. Therefore, these two approximations roughly balance each other out. Thus, from 400 billion = 0.4*(Andromeda's new estimate), we determine that Andromeda's new estimate is 1,000 billion. Given that the new estimates have doubled the numbers for the Andromeda galaxy, its old number was 500 billion.

Consequently, prior to the new estimates, the Andromeda galaxy had \(\frac{500}{124} \approx 4\) times more stars than the Milky Way galaxy.


Answer: B
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 05 Jun 2026
Posts: 111,115
Own Kudos:
818,971
 [1]
Given Kudos: 106,689
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 111,115
Kudos: 818,971
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
magnamut
Hi Bunuel , could you please explain why we took 500/124 and not (500-124)/124? Also, could you elaborate on when we should be taking a/b vs a-b/b

Thank you


When you ask “how many times more stars did Andromeda have”, you compare the full Andromeda amount to the Milky Way amount. That is why the fraction is Andromeda_old divided by MilkyWay_old, which is 500/124.

If you do (500 - 124)/124, that gives the percent increase, not the number of times larger.
User avatar
popcorn98
Joined: 23 Sep 2025
Last visit: 05 Jun 2026
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 48
Products:
Posts: 15
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This is a great question that’s helpful for learning and I did not quite understand the solution. If the question is asking for "how many times more" shouldn't the answer be 3 times? since 4 times the number of stars in milky way is that of andromeda so it just 33 times "more"?
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 05 Jun 2026
Posts: 111,115
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 106,689
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 111,115
Kudos: 818,971
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
popcorn98
This is a great question that’s helpful for learning and I did not quite understand the solution. If the question is asking for "how many times more" shouldn't the answer be 3 times? since 4 times the number of stars in milky way is that of andromeda so it just 33 times "more"?

Here is my post from another topic addressing this issue:

Agree that it's confusing but check below:

Merriam Webster's Dictionary of English Usage:


The argument in this case is that times more (or times larger, times stronger, times brighter, etc.) is ambiguous, so that "He has five times more money than you" can be misunderstood as meaning "He has six times as much money as you." It is, in fact, possible to misunderstand times more in this way, but it takes a good deal of effort. If you have $100, five times that is $500, which means that "five times more than $100" can mean (the commentators claim) "$500 more than $100," which equals "$600," which equals "six times as much as $100." The commentators regard this as a serious ambiguity, and they advise you to avoid it by always saying "times as much" instead of "times more." Here again, it seems that they are paying homage to mathematics at the expense of language. The fact is that "five times more" and "five times as much" are idiomatic phrases which have - and are understood to have - exactly the same meaning.

The "ambiguity" of times more is imaginary: in the world of actual speech and writing, the meaning of times more is clear and unequivocal. It is an idiom that has existed in our language for more than four centuries, and there is no real reason to avoid its use.

More on this here.

Also, check the following posts by Ianstewart:

Quote:
IanStewart


There seems to be some confusion about this earlier in this thread. The phrase "X is 2 times greater than Y" simply means that X = 2Y. It's understandable that this might seem confusing, because if instead we say "X is 200% greater than Y" we definitely mean that X = 3Y, but this all boils down to idiomatic usage in English. If you think of smaller numbers, it might be clear this is how the phrase is used in the language (there's a reason you've never heard anyone say "X is 1 times greater than Y" to mean that X is twice as big as Y), and it's also what the dictionary says, as quoted at this link:

https://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/61774.html
Moderators:
Math Expert
111115 posts
Founder
43376 posts