I don't see an imageGurpinder wrote:
are the first three NOT finite in length?
gmatprep - number line
This topic has expert replies
Source: Beat The GMAT — Problem Solving |
-
beatthegmatinsept
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 422
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 11:47 am
- Thanked: 22 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:680
Being defeated is often only a temporary condition. Giving up is what makes it permanent.
-
Gurpinder
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:12 am
- Thanked: 32 times
- Followed by:3 members
Hm.....beatthegmatinsept wrote:I don't see an imageGurpinder wrote:
are the first three NOT finite in length?
go here: https://postimage.org/image/1lbr0xb7o/
"Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress."
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
-
Gurpinder
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:12 am
- Thanked: 32 times
- Followed by:3 members
Thought so.apex231 wrote:Option E seems correct.
the question asks for finite length segment, this eliminates options A, B and C.
another condition asked in question is "single" line segment. This eliminates option D.
Thx apex!
"Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress."
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
-
Brian@VeritasPrep
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
- Location: Malibu, CA
- Thanked: 716 times
- Followed by:255 members
- GMAT Score:750
Hey Gurpinder,
This may have already been answered, but the wording "which s finite" means that anything that is infinite is incorrect.
Let's just consider something quick like x>0. Well, any positive number would satisfy that, and you can always add 1 to the biggest number you can think of (and then do it again, and again, and again), so there are an infinite number of numbers that would satisfy that, and the line would go infinitely to the right.
With something like x^2 > 4, that means that anything other than values between -2 and 2 would satisfy this inequality. 25, for example, when squared becomes much larger (625) than 4, and you can keep increasing x to get bigger and bigger. That segment would go on infinitely to the right; the same is true of a line extending all the way to the left. -100, when squared, is much bigger than 4, too, and you can keep making that value lower and lower by adding negative numbers, so it would also have a line extend all the way left, infinitely.
What they're looking for is an inequality that will pin the values of x between two. Something like x^2 < 4 would work. The only numbers that work are values of x that have an absolute value of less than 2. -1 works, 1 works, 0 works...but -3 and 3 do not, so that line would be a line of finite length between -2 and 2.
This may have already been answered, but the wording "which s finite" means that anything that is infinite is incorrect.
Let's just consider something quick like x>0. Well, any positive number would satisfy that, and you can always add 1 to the biggest number you can think of (and then do it again, and again, and again), so there are an infinite number of numbers that would satisfy that, and the line would go infinitely to the right.
With something like x^2 > 4, that means that anything other than values between -2 and 2 would satisfy this inequality. 25, for example, when squared becomes much larger (625) than 4, and you can keep increasing x to get bigger and bigger. That segment would go on infinitely to the right; the same is true of a line extending all the way to the left. -100, when squared, is much bigger than 4, too, and you can keep making that value lower and lower by adding negative numbers, so it would also have a line extend all the way left, infinitely.
What they're looking for is an inequality that will pin the values of x between two. Something like x^2 < 4 would work. The only numbers that work are values of x that have an absolute value of less than 2. -1 works, 1 works, 0 works...but -3 and 3 do not, so that line would be a line of finite length between -2 and 2.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep
Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep
Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
-
Gurpinder
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:12 am
- Thanked: 32 times
- Followed by:3 members
Thx alot for that Brian.Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Hey Gurpinder,
This may have already been answered, but the wording "which s finite" means that anything that is infinite is incorrect.
Let's just consider something quick like x>0. Well, any positive number would satisfy that, and you can always add 1 to the biggest number you can think of (and then do it again, and again, and again), so there are an infinite number of numbers that would satisfy that, and the line would go infinitely to the right.
With something like x^2 > 4, that means that anything other than values between -2 and 2 would satisfy this inequality. 25, for example, when squared becomes much larger (625) than 4, and you can keep increasing x to get bigger and bigger. That segment would go on infinitely to the right; the same is true of a line extending all the way to the left. -100, when squared, is much bigger than 4, too, and you can keep making that value lower and lower by adding negative numbers, so it would also have a line extend all the way left, infinitely.
What they're looking for is an inequality that will pin the values of x between two. Something like x^2 < 4 would work. The only numbers that work are values of x that have an absolute value of less than 2. -1 works, 1 works, 0 works...but -3 and 3 do not, so that line would be a line of finite length between -2 and 2.
Great explanation!!!!
"Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress."
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
