It is currently 18 Dec 2017, 10:26

# Final Week of R1 Decisions:

CHAT Rooms | MIT Sloan | McCombs

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# w, x, y, and z are integers. If w > x > y > z >

Author Message
Director
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 775

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

w, x, y, and z are integers. If w > x > y > z > [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 05:35
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (04:59) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

This topic is locked. If you want to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum.

w, x, y, and z are integers. If w > x > y > z > 0, is y a common divisor of w and x?

(1)w/x = (1/z) + (1/x)
(2) w^2 - wy - 2w = 0

OA later

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 07:42
Is it C? If so, let me know and I'll give my reasoning. If not, I don't want to look like an idiot...lol

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 775

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 08:07
I don't want to tell OA now. Let others apply their minds.

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 431

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 09:40
For me it is B.
w-y-2=0
w=y+2
hence
x=y+1
so: y, x and w are consecutives.
And they are not 1,2 and 3 as there is still z which is greater than 0.
y is not a common divisor of w and x

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Posts: 63

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 10:05
i found the same answer with the same thinking as Caas. I think B.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 165

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 10:38
I'm gonna go with D on this one.

For both statements, you can prove that w and x are consecutive integers so that there can be no common divisor that is an integer.

If you look at statement 1:

w/x = (1/z) + (1/x)

Since you know that w > x, then w/x must be >1. The last term, (1/x), has to be a fraction because x is >1, therefore in order to make this equation true, z must equal 1.

So now, we have:

w/x = 1 + (1/x)

Multiply both sides by x and we get:

w = x + 1. Therefore, w and x are consecutive integers.

Statement 2:

w^2 - wy - 2w. Factor out a w and you end up with w-y-2=0.

Like Caas explained above, this is the same as w=y+2. thus, y,x, and w are consecutive integers and they are not 1, 2, and 3 because z needs to be a positive integer as well.

Therefore, D?

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2553

Kudos [?]: 539 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 10:47
Im lost

Kudos [?]: 539 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 165

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 11:05
just curious -- how realistic is it to get one of these types of questions on the actual GMAT?

I have no idea how I would be able to figure out a problem like this in under 2 minutes and I'd probably end up guessing.

This problem took me a good 10 minutes to get a good grasp of, so I'm pretty scared now haha

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 171

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 12:16
plaguerabbit wrote:
I'm gonna go with D on this one.

For both statements, you can prove that w and x are consecutive integers so that there can be no common divisor that is an integer.

If you look at statement 1:

w/x = (1/z) + (1/x)

Since you know that w > x, then w/x must be >1. The last term, (1/x), has to be a fraction because x is >1, therefore in order to make this equation true, z must equal 1.

So now, we have:

w/x = 1 + (1/x)

Multiply both sides by x and we get:

w = x + 1. Therefore, w and x are consecutive integers.

Statement 2:

w^2 - wy - 2w. Factor out a w and you end up with w-y-2=0.

Like Caas explained above, this is the same as w=y+2. thus, y,x, and w are consecutive integers and they are not 1, 2, and 3 because z needs to be a positive integer as well.

Therefore, D?

I too thought on the same lines. It has to be D . Can we have the OA please ?

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 775

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 16:09
plaguerabbit wrote:
I'm gonna go with D on this one.

For both statements, you can prove that w and x are consecutive integers so that there can be no common divisor that is an integer.

If you look at statement 1:

w/x = (1/z) + (1/x)

Since you know that w > x, then w/x must be >1. The last term, (1/x), has to be a fraction because x is >1, therefore in order to make this equation true, z must equal 1.

So now, we have:

w/x = 1 + (1/x)

Multiply both sides by x and we get:

w = x + 1. Therefore, w and x are consecutive integers.

Statement 2:

w^2 - wy - 2w. Factor out a w and you end up with w-y-2=0.

Like Caas explained above, this is the same as w=y+2. thus, y,x, and w are consecutive integers and they are not 1, 2, and 3 because z needs to be a positive integer as well.

Therefore, D?

PERFECT explanation. OA is 'D'

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 775

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 16:10
plaguerabbit wrote:
I'm gonna go with D on this one.

For both statements, you can prove that w and x are consecutive integers so that there can be no common divisor that is an integer.

If you look at statement 1:

w/x = (1/z) + (1/x)

Since you know that w > x, then w/x must be >1. The last term, (1/x), has to be a fraction because x is >1, therefore in order to make this equation true, z must equal 1.

So now, we have:

w/x = 1 + (1/x)

Multiply both sides by x and we get:

w = x + 1. Therefore, w and x are consecutive integers.

Statement 2:

w^2 - wy - 2w. Factor out a w and you end up with w-y-2=0.

Like Caas explained above, this is the same as w=y+2. thus, y,x, and w are consecutive integers and they are not 1, 2, and 3 because z needs to be a positive integer as well.

Therefore, D?

PERFECT explanation. OA is 'D'

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 May 2007, 16:33
Makes sense now. My error was that in statement 1, i did not catch the fact they were consecutive int's. Glad to have you guys to fall back on.

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

20 May 2007, 16:33
Display posts from previous: Sort by