BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Featured Course
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
inequalities
Source: Beat The GMAT — Data Sufficiency |
statement 1:
x>0
x is positive
no information about y
Insufficient
statement 2:
y<0
y is negative
no information about x
Insufficient
Combining both the statements we get
x is positive and y is negative
Let x=2 & y=-3
(x-y)/(x+y)=-5
Is -5>1 ....Ans is no
Let x=3 & y=-2
(x-y)/(x+y)=5
Is 5>1 ...Ans is yes
So the ans should be E....
x>0
x is positive
no information about y
Insufficient
statement 2:
y<0
y is negative
no information about x
Insufficient
Combining both the statements we get
x is positive and y is negative
Let x=2 & y=-3
(x-y)/(x+y)=-5
Is -5>1 ....Ans is no
Let x=3 & y=-2
(x-y)/(x+y)=5
Is 5>1 ...Ans is yes
So the ans should be E....
Why shouldnt we simplify the above given equation?
for example, in the above question I simplified the equation to:
y<0
since the first choice is x>0,
and since we have derived y<0;
(x-y) / (x+y) => will be like (x+y) /(x-y)
there fore surely, this will be greater than 1.
There fore my choice was A.
Please some one throw more light on this!
for example, in the above question I simplified the equation to:
y<0
since the first choice is x>0,
and since we have derived y<0;
(x-y) / (x+y) => will be like (x+y) /(x-y)
there fore surely, this will be greater than 1.
There fore my choice was A.
Please some one throw more light on this!
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
Ian Stewart
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2623
- Location: Montreal
- Thanked: 1090 times
- GMAT Score:780
There are two issues above- both are common mistakes, so important to understand:msvmuthu wrote:Why shouldnt we simplify the above given equation?
for example, in the above question I simplified the equation to:
y<0
since the first choice is x>0,
and since we have derived y<0;
(x-y) / (x+y) => will be like (x+y) /(x-y)
there fore surely, this will be greater than 1.
There fore my choice was A.
Please some one throw more light on this!
First, you've 'simplified' the inequality to get y < 0, then used this as part of your solution. You can't do this: 'Is (x-y)/(x+y) > 1?' was the question; it's not a fact. If you assume that (x-y)/(x+y) > 1 is true, it shouldn't be surprising that you then discover that (x-y)/(x+y) > 1 is true; this is what's called 'begging the question' in logic. It can be a very good idea to simplify expressions like the one in the question above, but be clear about what you're doing: you are not deriving a fact; instead you are rephrasing the question.
Second, when you have an inequality, if you multiply both sides of the inequality by a negative, you must reverse the inequality. If, say, you know that
a/b > 1
you cannot multiply both sides by b and conclude that a > b, at least not without knowing something about b. It is certainly true that a > b if b is positive, but if b is negative, we would need to reverse the inequality; we would find that a < b. When you rewrote the inequality:
(x-y)/(x+y) > 1
to get y < 0, you were assuming x+y is positive. If x+y is negative, you need to reverse the inequality; you would find that y > 0.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com
ianstewartgmat.com
ianstewartgmat.com
Ian, can you explain the fallacy in my logic as described here? https://www.beatthegmat.com/x-y-x-y-1-t47013.html
