If p, s, and t are positive integer, is |ps - pt| p(s - t) ?

Question

If p, s, and t are positive integer, is |ps - pt| > p(s - t) ?

(1) p < s
(2) s < t

BrentGMATPrepNow · Accepted Answer

ENGRTOMBA2018 · Answer

Do not forget to mention the source of the question. it is simple after you realise that as p is positive, you can rewrite the given inequality as |ps-pt| > p(s-t) = p|s-t| > p(s-t) , you can also remove 'p' from both the sides , leaving you with is |s-t| > s-t which is very clearly obtainable if you know about the relative relation between t and s (side note, not required for this question: for |s-t| > s-t to be true, this means that s-t<0 or s

MathRevolution · Answer

Forget conventional ways of solving math questions. In DS, Variable approach is the easiest and quickest way to find the answer without actually solving the problem. Remember equal number of variables and independent equations ensures a solution.

If p,s, and t are positive integer, is |ps-pt| > p(s-t)?

(1) p < s
(2) s < t

When you modify the condition and the question, |ps-pt| > p(s-t)?--> ps-pt<0?, therefore p(s-t)<0?. Since p>0, you need to find out s-t<0?. In 2), s-t<0, which is yes and sufficient. Therefore, the answer is B.

-> Once we modify the original condition and the question according to the variable approach method 1, we can solve approximately 30% of DS questions.

chetan2u · Answer

jkolachi · Answer

Excellent question, this one looks a lot tricker than it actually is. Took me for a ride until I saw the "only positive integers". So let's look at |ps - pt| > P(s-t) or re-write it as | p(s-t)| > p (s-t). Now let's consider a possibility where P(s-t) is greater than | p(s-t)| , think about this one. I can't come up with one. So there's no way | p(s-t | < p (s-t). We know that |p(s-t)| is always positive. So if p (s-t) is negative then, lets call P (s-t) x, so |x| > x is equal when both positive and |x| < x when x is negative correct? Since all of them are positive, to make P (s-t) negative, T has to be bigger than S. That's the only option. No other way to make it negative since they're all positive. T > s is necessary. 1) insufficient. 2) sufficient ! Here's a easy way: re-write : |p (s-t)| > p(s-t) let call inside X. |x| > x only if X is negative. so if all are positive, (s-t) has to be negative. for that T has to be bigger than S. Bam!

Nikkb · Answer

If p,s, and t are positive integer, is |ps-pt| > p(s-t)
=> Find is |p(s-t)| > p(s-t)

As we know |x| > x only when x is -ve . When x is positive |x| =x

So here we have to check if product p*(s-t) is -ve or not. => either p is -ve or (s-t) is -ve. If both -ve, than product will become +ve => |x|=x

given in question stem that all variables are +ve. So we have to find if (s-t) is -ve or not. => we have to find is s<t or not.

(1) p < s
This just tell value of p is less than s . Not sufficient.

(2) s < t
This directly gives us equation that we are looking for.
=> s<t => (s-t) is -ve => p(s-t) is -ve => |p(s-t)| > p(s-t)
Sufficient

Answer: B

NirjonS · Answer

BrentGmatPrepNow wrote " if x = 5 and y = 2, then we get: |5 - 2| = 5 - 2. In this case |x - y| = x - y
CONVERSELY, if x = 4 and y = 6, then we get: |4 - 6| = 4 - 6. In this case |x - y| ≠ x - y"

My question is if x = 5 and y = 2, then we get: |5 - 2| = 5 - 2. In this case |x - y| = x - y
Then why not if x = 4 and y = 6, then we get: |4 - 6| = 4 - 6. In this case |x - y| = x - y ? since |x - y| can be thought as the DISTANCE between x and y on the number line?

chetan2u · Answer

|x-y| is the distance and distance is always positive, so |4-6|=|-2|=2, but x-y=4-6=-2.
2 is not equal to-2

ScottTargetTestPrep · Answer

Solution: Question Stem Analysis: We need to determine whether |ps - pt| > p(s - t). Notice that ps - pt = p(s - t). Since |x| > x if and only if x is negative, we need to determine whether p(s - t) is negative. Lastly, since p is positive, we really need to determine whether s - t is negative. Statement One Alone: Since we don’t know anything about t (except that it’s positive), statement one alone is not sufficient. Statement Two Alone: Since s < t, then s - t < 0, i.e., s - t is negative. Therefore, p(s - t) < 0 and |ps - pt| > p(s - t). Statement two alone is sufficient. Answer: B

gmatbyexample · Answer

Please see below for the full solution. The problem simplifies after opening up the modulus sign and a little bit of reasoning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DThVtrgrXU

Apologies, had linked to incorrect video initially.

rocky620 · Answer

chetan2u  sir

If it were not given that p,s, and t are +ve intergers, but only that they are some number not equal to zero. Is the below approach valid?

Q: If p, s, and t are integers, is |ps - pt| > p(s - t)?

We can re arrange the ineq. as:

Case: 1 
ps - pt > ps - pt
0 > 0
It is not possible, hence we can discard this case.

Case: 2 
ps - pt > -(ps - pt)
ps - pt > pt - ps
2ps - 2pt > 0
ps - pt > 0
p(s-t)>0

In this case we will check whether both, p and (s-t), are either +ve or -ve.

chetan2u · Answer

You are correct in the approach but there is an error in the red portion.

You have to take negative of the mod. 
So -(ps-pt)>ps-pt 
p(t-s)>0

You can also look at it in the following manner
1) If ps>pt 
Both sides will be positive and equal…….Answer will be NO
2) If pt >ps
|ps-pt|>0, but ps-pt <0…. Answer will be YES
3) If ps=pt 
0=0…. Answer will be NO

So if we can find the relation between ps and Pt, we will get our answer.

Vegita · Answer

Hi  BrentGMATPrepNow

I am Curios to understand why squaring on both sides of the original equation doesn't work to solve this question. Can you please help explain?

Bunuel · Answer

We can only square inequality when both sides are non-negative, which is not the case for |s - t| > (s - t). By the ways |s - t| > (s - t) is true ONLY when s - t < 0, so we cannot square.

When dealing with inequalities, it's important to remember that we can only square both sides of the inequality if both sides are non-negative. However, this condition is not met in cases such as |s - t| > (s - t) because the inequality |s - t| > (s - t) is only true when the value of s - t is negative. Therefore, attempting to square both sides of the inequality in this case would not be valid.

shardsingh1134527 · Answer

|ps-pt| => |p(s-t)| 
|p(s-t)| > p(s-t)
if s< t then only the above condition will hold. if s=t then both side will become 0 hence inequality will not hold. if s > t then then both the side on inequality will become equal hence the condition will not hold.

Hence B is the answer

bumpbot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club BumpBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

If p, s, and t are positive integer, is |ps - pt| > p(s - t) ?

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Data Sufficiency (DS) Questions

If p, s, and t are positive integer, is |ps - pt| > p(s - t) ?

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards