joyseychow,
Could you kindly post the source of the question?
Prime & Square
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:24 pm
Great interpretation! I think your translation of statement A is correct. But, if a prime factor enters "n" an odd number of times, it may no longer be the square of an interger. Take 8 for example:navalpike wrote:My answer is D.
A.) I am translating this to mean that if there is �any� prime number in N, then the p^2 version of that prime is also in N. Meaning � Every prime is squared.
If this is the correct interpretation, then this is sufficient. A perfect square, when reduced to primes, will have even numbers as exponents of those primes. For Example.
2*3*5*7 = Not a perfect square
2^2*3^2*5^2*7^2 = perfect square.
Sufficient.
8=2*2*2
2 and 2^2=4 are factors, but sqrt(8) is not an interger. Thus A is insufficient.
Answer: B
- vaibhavdoshi
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:18 am
There have been examples of proofs that Statement 1 is insufficient (which I think it is). For example someone gave the example of n = 18. So the prime factors of 18 are 2 and 3 right. But 2 squared is NOT a divisor of 18! Does this not disqualify 18 from consideration as a possible n? The same goes for 45 whose prime factors are 3 and 5. 5 squared is not a divisor of 45. However 27 may work because 3 is the only prime factor and 3 squared is a divisor of 27. We know 27 is not a perfect square. Also---maybe the word "distinct" may have made things a bit clearer?
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 9:02 pm
- Thanked: 62 times
- Followed by:6 members
is it B?
1 is insufficient because if we consider n as 27, prime factor is 3 and also 27 is divisible by 3^2 but still 27 is not a perfect square.
user123321
1 is insufficient because if we consider n as 27, prime factor is 3 and also 27 is divisible by 3^2 but still 27 is not a perfect square.
user123321
Just started my preparation
Want to do it right the first time.
Want to do it right the first time.
D.
question says that for every prime number p if p is divisor of n then p2 will also be divisor.
n=45, p=3 => n is divisible by p2 but n is not a square of any number.
but we should take p=5 also. In this case p2 is not divisor of n.
So it can be concluded that n is not square of any number.
So first stmt is sufficient.
Second one is known to every one.
Thanks
question says that for every prime number p if p is divisor of n then p2 will also be divisor.
n=45, p=3 => n is divisible by p2 but n is not a square of any number.
but we should take p=5 also. In this case p2 is not divisor of n.
So it can be concluded that n is not square of any number.
So first stmt is sufficient.
Second one is known to every one.
Thanks
mehravikas wrote:Answer shouldn't be D...
Statement 1 -
n = 45, p = 3
p is a divisor of n
also p^2 is a divisor of n
but n in this case is not a square of an integer.
shahdevine wrote:you may be right. my interpretation is wrong. we need OAs...zeenab wrote:I think the answer is D as well.
If a number is a perfect square, all of its prime factors have to occur an even number of times in its factorization. Which means, if the number is divisible by a prime number n, it should be divisble by n^2 as well.
So if the corollary holds good as well.
Example -
Take 100 which is 10^2
(5*2)^2 - so the number is divisible by 5 and 5^2 and 2 and 2^2.
OA please?
- karthikpandian19
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1665
- Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:04 pm
- Thanked: 165 times
- Followed by:70 members
I got the answer as B
What is the OA?
Can any expert throw light on the Statement 1?
What is the OA?
Can any expert throw light on the Statement 1?
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON
---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" ---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON
---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" ---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
- eagleeye
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 520
- Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:12 pm
- Thanked: 339 times
- Followed by:49 members
- GMAT Score:770
OA must be B. There is no other correct answer. Let me explain.
First, there seems to be a debate about "interpretation" of the first statement. There is only one way of doing so.
Hold on, I am going to give my first "verbal" explanation in "quantitative". As Norm Macdonald would say, "Ridiculous". Let`s get on with it.
We are told : "For every prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p^2
For every prime number p. This only means one thing; it means that p is a prime number.
To interpret it the |other| way, unambiguously, the statement will need to be:
For every prime factor (p) of n, repetitions included, if p is divisor of n, so is p^2. Clearly, this is NOT what the statement asks. So we interpret it as the authors intended. That if there is a prime factor p of n, then there is also p^2 as a factor.
For the question, we are asked, if n is square of a positive integer.
1) Let p = 2 be a factor, then 2^2=4 is a factor, but what if the number was 8. Then it satisfies the 2, 2^2 as factors condition. But 8 is not a square. Hence A is insufficient.
2) We are given that sqrt(n) = m, where (m,n are positive integers);
Squaring both sides, we get n=m^2. Clearly this is what the question asked. Sufficient. Hence B
Let me know if this helps
First, there seems to be a debate about "interpretation" of the first statement. There is only one way of doing so.
Hold on, I am going to give my first "verbal" explanation in "quantitative". As Norm Macdonald would say, "Ridiculous". Let`s get on with it.
We are told : "For every prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p^2
For every prime number p. This only means one thing; it means that p is a prime number.
To interpret it the |other| way, unambiguously, the statement will need to be:
For every prime factor (p) of n, repetitions included, if p is divisor of n, so is p^2. Clearly, this is NOT what the statement asks. So we interpret it as the authors intended. That if there is a prime factor p of n, then there is also p^2 as a factor.
For the question, we are asked, if n is square of a positive integer.
1) Let p = 2 be a factor, then 2^2=4 is a factor, but what if the number was 8. Then it satisfies the 2, 2^2 as factors condition. But 8 is not a square. Hence A is insufficient.
2) We are given that sqrt(n) = m, where (m,n are positive integers);
Squaring both sides, we get n=m^2. Clearly this is what the question asked. Sufficient. Hence B
Let me know if this helps
- Abhijeet03
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:34 am
- Thanked: 1 times
Seems u copied answer from your neighbour ..lolz
shahdevine wrote:cool i'm not crazy...for a minute i was racking my brains. I thought I was from another planet when everyone was getting Ds instead of B.scoobydooby wrote:would go with B
stmnt 1 is not sufficient by itself.
if N=9, divisible by 3 and 3^2 . yes N perfect square
if N=27, divisble by 3 and 3^2. no N not perfect square
stmnt 2 sufficient
all perfect squares have integers as their square roots.
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 9:34 pm
According to me,Answer should be B
Is the positive integer n equal to the square of an integer?
Statement 1:
For every prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p^2.
Let say p = 5
P can be divisor of 50 or of 225
and p^2 also divides both. So Not Sufficient as 50 is not a perfect square and 225 is.
Statement 2:
sqrt(n) is an integer.
Which itself explains that positive integer n is a square of an integer.
Also, OA is mentioned here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/is-the-positi ... 17148.html
It is B..
Thanks
Is the positive integer n equal to the square of an integer?
Statement 1:
For every prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p^2.
Let say p = 5
P can be divisor of 50 or of 225
and p^2 also divides both. So Not Sufficient as 50 is not a perfect square and 225 is.
Statement 2:
sqrt(n) is an integer.
Which itself explains that positive integer n is a square of an integer.
Also, OA is mentioned here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/is-the-positi ... 17148.html
It is B..
Thanks
-
- 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
Let's settle this one!
Is n = k², where k is an integer?
S1:: For EVERY prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p².
This means that n has AT LEAST TWO of each of its unique prime factors. For instance, if 3 is a divisor of n, then 3² is a divisor of n; if n is a divisor of n, then 2² is a divisor of n, etc. So the example of n = 18 given before isn't valid: 2 divides n, so 2² must divide n - we can't pick a number that violates the property given. We need to pick numbers that have AT LEAST TWO of each unique prime factor.
That said, here are two (contradictory) integers that would satisfy S1. Suppose n = 36. Then n has AT LEAST TWO of each of its prime factors (2 and 3) and IS a perfect square. Now suppose that n = 72. n again has AT LEAST two of each of its prime factors (2 and 3), but is NOT a perfect square, as n has an odd number of 2s in its prime factorization. INSUFFICIENT.
The key distinction here is that saying a number has AT LEAST TWO of each prime factor is not the same thing as saying EXACTLY TWO of each prime factor. To be a perfect square, a number must have an EVEN number of each of its unique primes, as you must be able to group the unique primes into TWO identical roots. To illustrate:
36 = 2*2*3*3 = (2*3) * (2*3) = a perfect square
72 = 2*2*2*3*3 = (2*3) * (2*3) * 2 = not a perfect square
S2:: √n is an integer. Then n = √n * √n = integer * itself = a perfect square. SUFFICIENT!
Is n = k², where k is an integer?
S1:: For EVERY prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p².
This means that n has AT LEAST TWO of each of its unique prime factors. For instance, if 3 is a divisor of n, then 3² is a divisor of n; if n is a divisor of n, then 2² is a divisor of n, etc. So the example of n = 18 given before isn't valid: 2 divides n, so 2² must divide n - we can't pick a number that violates the property given. We need to pick numbers that have AT LEAST TWO of each unique prime factor.
That said, here are two (contradictory) integers that would satisfy S1. Suppose n = 36. Then n has AT LEAST TWO of each of its prime factors (2 and 3) and IS a perfect square. Now suppose that n = 72. n again has AT LEAST two of each of its prime factors (2 and 3), but is NOT a perfect square, as n has an odd number of 2s in its prime factorization. INSUFFICIENT.
The key distinction here is that saying a number has AT LEAST TWO of each prime factor is not the same thing as saying EXACTLY TWO of each prime factor. To be a perfect square, a number must have an EVEN number of each of its unique primes, as you must be able to group the unique primes into TWO identical roots. To illustrate:
36 = 2*2*3*3 = (2*3) * (2*3) = a perfect square
72 = 2*2*2*3*3 = (2*3) * (2*3) * 2 = not a perfect square
S2:: √n is an integer. Then n = √n * √n = integer * itself = a perfect square. SUFFICIENT!
- jaspreetsra
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 10:26 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
Question stem, rephrased:joyseychow wrote:Is the positive integer n equal to the square of an integer?
(1) For every prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p².
(2) √n is an integer.
Is n a perfect square?
Statement 1: For every prime number p, if p is a divisor of n, then so is p².
Let p=2, implying that both p=2 and p²=4 are factors of n.
It's possible that n=4, in which case n is a perfect square.
It's possible that n=8, in which case n is NOT a perfect square.
INSUFFICIENT.
Statement 2: √n is an integer.
In other words:
√n = k, where k is an integer.
Squaring both sides, we get:
n = k².
Thus, n is a perfect square.
SUFFICIENT.
The correct answer is B.
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