Welcome! Check out our free B-School Guides to learn how you compare with other applicants.
Login or Register

Is Zero to be considered a multiple of all the numbers?

This topic has 3 expert replies and 9 member replies
g_beatthegmat Really wants to Beat The GMAT! Default Avatar
Joined
27 Jul 2007
Posted:
100 messages
Thanked:
6 times
Target GMAT Score:
720+
Is Zero to be considered a multiple of all the numbers? Post Thu Aug 02, 2007 4:26 am
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    Hello,

    Is Zero considered a multiple of all the numbers? I came across question # 13 in the Full-Length Practice Test of Kaplan which says-

    Quote:
    Ques: If x is a prime number, what is the value of x?
    (1) x < 15
    (2) (x - 2) is a multiple of 5.
    Now here (1) and (2) separately aren't enough. (1) could be 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13. And (2) could be 7, 17, 37... this is where I'm corrected by the book, which says 0 also needs to be considered as a factor of a number- which would make the possible vales for (2) as 2, 7, 17, 37...

    So considering 0 would change the answer of this question to (E)-both not sufficient from (C)-statement 1 & 2 together are sufficient.

    If zero is a multiple of all the numbers, then shouldn't it be considered for calculating the LCM & GCM of all the numbers as well? Rolling Eyes

    Thanks in advance



    Last edited by g_beatthegmat on Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:25 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    beny Really wants to Beat The GMAT! Default Avatar
    Joined
    20 Jul 2007
    Posted:
    214 messages
    Thanked:
    3 times
    Post Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:43 pm
    0 is not considered a multiple of all numbers.

    Either way, as you stated, with statement 2, the answer could be 7, 12, 17, 22, ... therefore, B is insufficient byitself.

    I think the answer should be C, which would narrow the answer to 7 (since 12 is not a prime).

    Post Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:26 pm
    In this case also, only prime multiple of 5 and less than 15 is 5 itself only.
    Hence, both statements ensure we have unique answer.

    g_beatthegmat Really wants to Beat The GMAT! Default Avatar
    Joined
    27 Jul 2007
    Posted:
    100 messages
    Thanked:
    6 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    720+
    Post Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:36 pm
    thanks benny and lalitgmat!

    So the conclusion: Zero is NOT to be considered a factor of numbers. We can then define factor as:
    Factor is a +ve number that completely divides into another +ve integer.

    Thanks.

    ash g Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    15 Oct 2007
    Posted:
    30 messages
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:03 pm
    Guys,
    Just wanted to reopen this old thread. Is what is concluded in this thread correct ?
    So the conclusion: Zero is NOT to be considered a factor of numbers.
    This would also mean Kaplan explanation is incorrect which I dont think so.

    I happen to believe that - All numbers divide zero and hence zero is a multiple of all numbers.

    The example of LCM used to contradict above I think is incorrect.
    The wiki definition of LCM is:
    In arithmetic and number theory, the least common multiple or lowest common multiple (lcm) or smallest common multiple of two integers a and b is the smallest positive integer that is a multiple of both a and b. Since it is a multiple, it can be divided by a and b without a remainder. If there is no such positive integer, e.g., if a = 0 or b = 0, then lcm(a, b) is defined to be zero.

    Any thoughts ??

    GMAT/MBA Expert

    Stuart Kovinsky GMAT Instructor
    Joined
    08 Jan 2008
    Posted:
    3225 messages
    Followed by:
    529 members
    Thanked:
    1570 times
    GMAT Score:
    800
    Post Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:01 am
    0 is a multiple of all numbers; 0 is a factor of no number.

    Negative numbers are also multiples. For example, the set of all multiples of 5 is:

    {..., -15, -10, -5, 0, 5, 10, 15, ...}

    However, when we talk about the lowest common multiple, we're always referring to the smallest positive multiple of the numbers involved.

    So, to review this particular question:

    If x is prime, what's the value of x?

    (1) x < 15

    x could be 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13: insufficient

    (2) (x - 2) is a multiple of 5

    x could be billions and billions of different numbers: insufficient

    Together:

    If we look at our list from statement (1), (2-2)=0 which IS a multiple of 5 and (7-2)=5 which is ALSO a multiple of 5. Hence, x could still be either 2 or 7: choose (e).

    _________________
    Stuart Kovinsky, B.A. LL.B.
    Kaplan Test Prep & Admissions
    Toronto Office
    1-800-KAP-TEST
    www.kaptest.com

    Learn more about me

    Free GMAT Practice Test under Proctored Conditions! - Find a practice test near you or live and online in Kaplan's Classroom Anywhere environment. Register today!
    Atul Sharma Just gettin' started! Default Avatar
    Joined
    16 Nov 2009
    Posted:
    2 messages
    Post Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:16 am
    Dear all

    here it is not the question that who is right or Kaplan has given the explanation so it must be right

    If you read the question stem, the very first line says x is a prime.
    0 is not a prime so the answer should be C to the question (no need to consider 0 as multiple of any integer or whatso ever)

    Atul Sharma Just gettin' started! Default Avatar
    Joined
    16 Nov 2009
    Posted:
    2 messages
    Post Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:17 am
    Dear all

    here it is not the question that who is right or Kaplan has given the explanation so it must be right

    If you read the question stem, the very first line says x is a prime.
    0 is not a prime so the answer should be C to the question (no need to consider 0 as multiple of any integer or whatso ever)

    GMAT/MBA Expert

    Stuart Kovinsky GMAT Instructor
    Joined
    08 Jan 2008
    Posted:
    3225 messages
    Followed by:
    529 members
    Thanked:
    1570 times
    GMAT Score:
    800
    Post Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:44 am
    Atul Sharma wrote:
    Dear all

    here it is not the question that who is right or Kaplan has given the explanation so it must be right

    If you read the question stem, the very first line says x is a prime.
    0 is not a prime so the answer should be C to the question (no need to consider 0 as multiple of any integer or whatso ever)
    You're correct, 0 is not prime; however, that's irrelevant to the question.

    Statement (2) says that (x-2) is a multiple of 5, not that x is a multiple of 5.

    To satisfy (2), we can choose x=2 (which is prime), since 2-2=0 which is a multiple of 5.

    _________________
    Stuart Kovinsky, B.A. LL.B.
    Kaplan Test Prep & Admissions
    Toronto Office
    1-800-KAP-TEST
    www.kaptest.com

    Learn more about me

    Thanked by: Strongt
    Free GMAT Practice Test under Proctored Conditions! - Find a practice test near you or live and online in Kaplan's Classroom Anywhere environment. Register today!
    Post Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:33 pm
    the one law immutable laws of the universe is you do not EVER doubt the accuracy of Mr. Stuart!!

    _________________
    i got utterly defeated by the gmat.

    Laetitia Just gettin' started!
    Joined
    28 Mar 2012
    Posted:
    1 messages
    Post Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:59 am
    I'm trying different GMAT tests at the moment and I am stuck with this question:
    If x, y, z are three integers, are they consecutive integers?
    1) z=x+2
    2) None of the three integers are multiples of 3.

    If we consider 0 as a multiple of 3, then there is one consecutive suite: 0, 1, 2 without any element being a multiple of 3 and then both statements together are insufficient. However, if we consider that 0 is a multiple of 3 then the second statement is sufficient
    What do you think ? My book says that the statement 2) is enough.

    Thank you for your help

    GMAT/MBA Expert

    Bill@VeritasPrep GMAT Instructor
    Joined
    29 Mar 2012
    Posted:
    1248 messages
    Followed by:
    167 members
    Thanked:
    479 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    800
    GMAT Score:
    780
    Post Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:38 pm
    Since 0 is a multiple of 3 (and of every other integer), 0-1-2 is not a possible set of values for x, y, and z.

    For any set of 3 consecutive integers, 1 integer will be a multiple of 3. Thus, we know from Statement 2 that x, y, and z, CANNOT be consecutive integer

    _________________
    Join Veritas Prep’s 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

    Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

    Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test

    Get 7 Veritas Prep GMAT Practice Tests for Just $24! Veritas Prep’s computer-adaptive GMAT practice test are powered by artificial intelligence, guaranteeing that you see the most realistic GMAT questions and most accurate scores. Get Your Tests Now.
    Mathsbuddy Really wants to Beat The GMAT! Default Avatar
    Joined
    08 Nov 2013
    Posted:
    294 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    18 times
    Post Fri Nov 08, 2013 7:28 am
    Indeed,

    Zero is a multiple of all numbers. The question did not limit the answer to positive multiples.
    So the answer is 2 or 7 because both correctly match the criteria.

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 abhasjha 42 topics
    2 shibsriz@gmail.com 31 topics
    3 phanikpk 18 topics
    4 qwerty12321 15 topics
    5 DevB 15 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    173 posts
    2 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    166 posts
    3 image description ceilidh.erickson

    Manhattan GMAT Teacher

    52 posts
    4 image description CriticalSquareMBA

    Critical Square

    35 posts
    5 image description lunarpower

    Manhattan GMAT Teacher

    27 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts