Hi RohanNewDelhi,I see exactly where the worry is coming from, and it's worth untangling.
The question isn't asking
how far Maria walked in total - it's asking about
the length of the track, a fixed distance. And both statements time how long she took
to cover the track, i.e. to walk that one length once. So laps never enter the picture: the time given is the time for a single traversal of the track, which pins the length directly.
Here's the anchor the thread already set up. At
100 meters per minute, walking exactly
500 meters (half a kilometer) would take:
500 / (
100/
60) =
300 seconds.
So the whole question reduces to: was her time above or below
300 seconds?
Statement (2): she took
less than 290 seconds. Since
290 is already under
300, any time below it gives a length under
500 meters - a definite
No. One clear answer every time, so
sufficient.
Now the two-case check that makes (1) fail - the move that matters in DS:
- t =
251 s -> length ~
418 m -> No
- t =
350 s -> length ~
583 m -> Yes
Same statement, two different answers ->
not sufficient. That's why it's not E: E would require statement (2) to also leave two answers open, but it doesn't - it locks the length under
500 by itself.
The takeaway: when a statement allows two valid cases with different answers it's
not sufficient; when every allowed case lands on the same answer, it is.
Answer: BRohanNewDelhi
in the question they have asked about the length it could have been how much maria had walked? could have been 2-3 rounds shouldn't the answer be E?