Is x > 1?
1. (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0
2. |x| < 5
OA: A
OK, understand that 2 is definitely helpful, could you please breakdown option 1 please?
Another mod related question
This topic has expert replies
- utkalnayak
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2014 2:23 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
- GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
Statement 1: (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0utkalnayak wrote:Is x > 1?
1. (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0
2. |x| < 5
Determine the CRITICAL POINTS: the values where (x+1)(|x|-1) = 0.
(x+1)(|x|-1) = 0 when x=-1 or x=1.
To determine the ranges where (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0, test one value to the left and right of each critical point.
x<-1:
If we plug x=-2 into (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0, we get:
(-2+1)(|-2|-1) > 0
(-1)(1) > 0
-1 > 0.
Doesn't work.
Thus, x<-1 is not a valid range.
-1<x<1:
If we plug x=0 into (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0, we get:
(0+1)(|0|-1) > 0
(1)(-1) > 0
-1 > 0.
Doesn't work.
Thus, -1<x<1 is not a valid range.
x>1:
If we plug x=2 into (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0, we get:
(2+1)(|2|-1) > 0
(3)(1) > 0
3 > 0.
This works.
Thus, x>1 is a valid range.
Since x>1 is the only valid range, (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0 implies that x>1.
SUFFICIENT.
Statement 2: |x| < 5
It's possible that x=2, in which case x>1.
It's possible that x=0, in which case x<1.
INSUFFICIENT.
The correct answer is A.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
- DavidG@VeritasPrep
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
- Location: Boston, MA
- Thanked: 1153 times
- Followed by:128 members
- GMAT Score:770
As a general rule, when I see a setup where S1 is very complicated, and S2 is so obviously not sufficient that I can evaluate it in my head in three seconds, I become very very suspicious that the more complicated statement will be sufficient on its own.
Is x > 1?
1. (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0
The algebra looks hairy here, so I'd rather pick numbers. Say x = 2. That satisfies the statement, so clearly, I can get a YES to the question. Now the question is can I get a NO? Well, if x = 1/2, the product will be negative, so that won't work. And If x = -2, the product is still negative. Test away, and you'll see that only numbers bigger than one will work here, so S1 is sufficient. (Essentially, if -1 < x < 1 the first term will be positive and the second term will be negative, yielding a negative product. And if x < -1, the first term will be negative and the second term will be positive, again yielding a negative product. So then x is going to have to be bigger than 1.)
2. |x| < 5
x = 3 or x = 0; Not sufficient; (and this statement insulted our collective intelligence.)
Is x > 1?
1. (x+1)(|x|-1) > 0
The algebra looks hairy here, so I'd rather pick numbers. Say x = 2. That satisfies the statement, so clearly, I can get a YES to the question. Now the question is can I get a NO? Well, if x = 1/2, the product will be negative, so that won't work. And If x = -2, the product is still negative. Test away, and you'll see that only numbers bigger than one will work here, so S1 is sufficient. (Essentially, if -1 < x < 1 the first term will be positive and the second term will be negative, yielding a negative product. And if x < -1, the first term will be negative and the second term will be positive, again yielding a negative product. So then x is going to have to be bigger than 1.)
2. |x| < 5
x = 3 or x = 0; Not sufficient; (and this statement insulted our collective intelligence.)
- MartyMurray
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
- Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
- Thanked: 955 times
- Followed by:140 members
- GMAT Score:800
The one thing I would make clear is that for Statement 1 to work, both left side terms have to be either negative or positive, and neither can be 0.
So when you are plugging in, you don't need to actually solve the whole thing. You just need to see if you are creating either two positive terms or two negative terms. If you are not, then the number you are using doesn't work. If you are, then it does.
So when you are plugging in, you don't need to actually solve the whole thing. You just need to see if you are creating either two positive terms or two negative terms. If you are not, then the number you are using doesn't work. If you are, then it does.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
-
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2630
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pm
- Location: East Bay all the way
- Thanked: 625 times
- Followed by:119 members
- GMAT Score:780
Here's another algebraic approach.
Since |x| = √x², S1 really gives us
(x + 1)(√x² - 1) > 0
√x² * (x + 1) - 1 * (x + 1) > 0
√x² * (x + 1) > (x + 1)
At this point, we know that √x² is not 0 or 1. (If it were, both sides would be equal, but we're told that the left hand side is greater.) We thus have two cases to consider.
Case 1:: (x + 1) > 0
In this case, we divide both sides of the equation to get √x² > 1. This reduces to x > 1 or -1 > x, but the second case is impossible. (It would contradict (x + 1) > 0, i.e. x > -1, which we assumed to get here in the first place.)
Case 2:: 0 > (x + 1)
In this case, we divide both sides of the equation to get √x² < 1. This reduces to -1 < x < 1, but this is also impossible, since it contradicts 0 > (x + 1), or - 1 > x. Hence Case 2 is entirely impossible.
So the ONLY possibility is x > 1, and S1 is sufficient.
Since |x| = √x², S1 really gives us
(x + 1)(√x² - 1) > 0
√x² * (x + 1) - 1 * (x + 1) > 0
√x² * (x + 1) > (x + 1)
At this point, we know that √x² is not 0 or 1. (If it were, both sides would be equal, but we're told that the left hand side is greater.) We thus have two cases to consider.
Case 1:: (x + 1) > 0
In this case, we divide both sides of the equation to get √x² > 1. This reduces to x > 1 or -1 > x, but the second case is impossible. (It would contradict (x + 1) > 0, i.e. x > -1, which we assumed to get here in the first place.)
Case 2:: 0 > (x + 1)
In this case, we divide both sides of the equation to get √x² < 1. This reduces to -1 < x < 1, but this is also impossible, since it contradicts 0 > (x + 1), or - 1 > x. Hence Case 2 is entirely impossible.
So the ONLY possibility is x > 1, and S1 is sufficient.