MooneeyTunes wrote:
EMPOWERgmatRichC wrote:
MooneeyTunes wrote:
Bunuel Why is it 2^n and not 2^(n-1)? I used the formula for the nth term of GP. The other links to similar questions provided also do not address this. Could you please help out?
Hi MooneeyTunes,
The type of math notation you might choose to use will depend on the specific question that is ASKED. In this prompt, we're told that EACH YEAR the population doubles... meaning that we're going to multiply a 'starting number' by a certain number of "2s." Each year (including the first year) is another '2', so 2^N is appropriate here.
IF... that first year involved no change in the total (or a change other than a 'double') - AND you had to account for that first year while noting that it was NOT a year in which the population doubled - then 2^(N-1) would be appropriate.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
EMPOWERgmatRichCI am sorry. I am not sure if I completely follow this. Because if the population doubles every year and we write the series as 2000, 2*2000, 2^2*2000 and so on and consider first term of the G.P to be 2000 then the nth term should be 2000 * 2^(n-1).[/quote]
Hi MooneeyTunes,
It might be easier if we look at this from the 'beginning' of the sequence.
Starting number: 2000
Each year, that number has DOUBLED, so at the end of the first year (re: N = 1), the total will be 4000.
Consider 2^(n-1) in this situation. When n = 1....
2^(1-1) = 2^0 = 1..... (2000)(1) = 2000.... but we need it to be 4000. Thus, 2^(n-1) is not the proper notation.
With 2^n, when n = 1...
2^(1) = 2..... (2000)(2) = 4000.... This is a match for what the total is supposed to be.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich