Is x negative?
(1) x^3(1-x^2)<0
(2) x^2-1<0
Please provide explanation as well.
Is x negative?
This topic has expert replies
- selango
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
- Thanked: 135 times
- Followed by:7 members
x is -ve?
stmt1,
x^3(1-x^2)<0
x^3<0 or (1-x^2)<0
x^3<0,x is -ve
(1-x^2)<0-->x^2>1
x can be -ve or +ve
Insuff
stmt2,
x^2-1<0
x^2<1
x^2>=0
So x can be only 0.But o is neither +ve or -ve.
Combining 1 and 2,
x^2-1<0 or 1-x^2>0
-->x^3<0
x is -ve.
Suff
Pick C
stmt1,
x^3(1-x^2)<0
x^3<0 or (1-x^2)<0
x^3<0,x is -ve
(1-x^2)<0-->x^2>1
x can be -ve or +ve
Insuff
stmt2,
x^2-1<0
x^2<1
x^2>=0
So x can be only 0.But o is neither +ve or -ve.
Combining 1 and 2,
x^2-1<0 or 1-x^2>0
-->x^3<0
x is -ve.
Suff
Pick C
--Anand--
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 1:17 am
- Location: Rourkela/Hyderabad
- Thanked: 4 times
- Followed by:1 members
Hi,
My understanding is as below:
Firstly, The value for x^3(1 - x^2) depends on
a) x^3 is +ve/-ve
b) x^2 is greater than or less than 1.
If x < 0, x^3 < 0. But (1-x^2) depends on the exact value of x. It may be that x < 1 or x < 0
If x > 0, (1- X^2) has to be < 0. Thus x < 1.
Hence Insufficient.
Secondly, x^2 - 1 < 0.
Thus -1 < x < 1.
Hence insufficient.
On Combining both, we have x^2 < 1. So, (1 - x ^2) > 0.
We know x^3(1 - x^2) < 0.
So x^3 is < 0.
Hence x < 0.
Both the answer choices together are sufficient.
Please do let me know if its correct.
My understanding is as below:
Firstly, The value for x^3(1 - x^2) depends on
a) x^3 is +ve/-ve
b) x^2 is greater than or less than 1.
If x < 0, x^3 < 0. But (1-x^2) depends on the exact value of x. It may be that x < 1 or x < 0
If x > 0, (1- X^2) has to be < 0. Thus x < 1.
Hence Insufficient.
Secondly, x^2 - 1 < 0.
Thus -1 < x < 1.
Hence insufficient.
On Combining both, we have x^2 < 1. So, (1 - x ^2) > 0.
We know x^3(1 - x^2) < 0.
So x^3 is < 0.
Hence x < 0.
Both the answer choices together are sufficient.
Please do let me know if its correct.
Sandy
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
x^3(1-x^2)<0
x^3 <0 or (1-x^2) <0
when x^3 <0 :
x<0
when (1-x^2) <0
(1+x) ( 1-x) <0
So (1+x) <0 or ( 1-x) <0
(1+x) <0 leads to x<-1
( 1-x) <0 leads to x>1
Inconsistent . Insufficient
St2 : x^2-1<0
(x+1) (x-1) <0
So, x<-1 or x<1
Again st 2 in Insufficient.
Combining st1 & st2, we see that X is less than -1
Pick C
x^3 <0 or (1-x^2) <0
when x^3 <0 :
x<0
when (1-x^2) <0
(1+x) ( 1-x) <0
So (1+x) <0 or ( 1-x) <0
(1+x) <0 leads to x<-1
( 1-x) <0 leads to x>1
Inconsistent . Insufficient
St2 : x^2-1<0
(x+1) (x-1) <0
So, x<-1 or x<1
Again st 2 in Insufficient.
Combining st1 & st2, we see that X is less than -1
Pick C
- sanju09
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3650
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:27 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 267 times
- Followed by:80 members
- GMAT Score:760
greenwich wrote:Is x negative?
(1) x^3(1-x^2)<0
(2) x^2-1<0
Please provide explanation as well.
If (1) is (x^3) × (1 - x^2) < 0, then either x^3 < 0, which promptly makes x < 0; or (1 - x^2) < 0 for some positive x. Insufficient
Statement (2) translates to either x + 1 < 0 and x - 1 > 0, which is an impossible case, OR x + 1 > 0 and x - 1 < 0. This can be bargained to -1 < x < 1, which include both positive and negative values for x. Insufficient
In concert, we realize (1 - x^2) > 0, hence x^3 < 0 or [spoiler]x < 0.
C[/spoiler]
The mind is everything. What you think you become. -Lord Buddha
Sanjeev K Saxena
Quantitative Instructor
The Princeton Review - Manya Abroad
Lucknow-226001
www.manyagroup.com
Sanjeev K Saxena
Quantitative Instructor
The Princeton Review - Manya Abroad
Lucknow-226001
www.manyagroup.com
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
these are standard inequalities with factored expressions; you should know how to solve these routinely.greenwich wrote:Is x negative?
(1) x^3(1-x^2)<0
(2) x^2-1<0
Please provide explanation as well.
the process:
(1) make sure that you have zero on one side of the inequality (this is already done here)
(2) factor the other side
(3) find the zeroes (roots) of the other side
(4) test the regions of the number line between those roots, to see if they satisfy the inequality
--
statement (1)
factor --> (x^3)(1-x)(1+x) < 0
roots are -1, 0, 1
test the number line:
<.................FALSE...........(-1)...........TRUE........(0)..........FALSE............(1)............TRUE.............>
there are both negative and non-negative numbers in this solution, so, insufficient.
--
statement (2)
factor --> (x-1)(x+1) < 0
roots are -1, 1
test the number line:
<.................FALSE...........(-1).........TRUE............(1)............FALSE.............>
there are both negative and non-negative numbers in this solution, so, insufficient.
--
together
look at both of the number lines above, and notice that the only values that are common to both of them are -1 < x < 0.
these are all negative.
sufficient.
--
(c)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:02 am
this number line approach seems so tedious... i.e More than 2 minutes! Is it common on the GMAT these days?
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
it shouldn't be overly tedious -- it's actually the standard protocol for solving inequalities like this. if it seems tedious or long, that's probably because you haven't practiced it enough yet.missrochelle wrote:this number line approach seems so tedious... i.e More than 2 minutes! Is it common on the GMAT these days?
same as with any other algebraic process. the first time you solved a quadratic equation, complete with factoring and rearrangement of terms, you might have had the same thought -- but after solving hundreds of them, you would no longer find this to be the case. therefore, if the problem is just that you haven't solved very many of these, you may want to grab a high school algebra book and get cracking.
--
incidentally, it's also the standard way of solving inequalities that contain fractional expressions, too. when you make that number line for a fractional inequality, you need to include two kinds of values as boundary points of the regions:
1) values that are zeros of the corresponding equation (this is the same as what's shown here)
2) values that make the denominators of the fractions equal to zero.
so, for instance, given the equation (x + 2)(x - 3)/(x + 5) < 0, you have to include -2, 3, and -5 on your number line, not just -2 and 3.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron