aninditasivaram2406 wrote:1. If x and y are integers and x>0, is y>0?
·7x-2y>0
·-y>x
Answer E

I would say B is sufficient. -y>x implies y < -x. Given that x is positive,
y has to be negative. I hope I'm not missing something obvious

Hi Jayhawk,

Thats what I had thought. But the answer appears to be E. This is from GMAT prep...any thoughts?

Thanks,
Anindita

The question only states that x and y are integers. Therefore, substitute positive AND negative values and zero for x.

In statement 2: "-y>x" can also be written as "y<x>0" Simplify to get "y<-7x/2." Again try plugging positive and negative values for x. We get the same result as statement 2. Insufficient.

Combining Statements 1 and 2 they pretty much say the same thing as they do individually, only that statement 1 has a multiplier of 7/2. Statements 1 and 2 taken together are not sufficient. (E)


I always forget to check for +, -, and 0 on DS questions myself.

enlightenment wrote:The question only states that x and y are integers. Therefore, substitute positive AND negative values and zero for x.

In statement 2: "-y>x" can also be written as "y<x>0" Simplify to get "y<-7x/2." Again try plugging positive and negative values for x. We get the same result as statement 2. Insufficient.

Combining Statements 1 and 2 they pretty much say the same thing as they do individually, only that statement 1 has a multiplier of 7/2. Statements 1 and 2 taken together are not sufficient. (E)


I always forget to check for +, -, and 0 on DS questions myself.

enlightenment, the question also says that both X & Y are greater than 0. So we cannot assume a -ve value for eithe x or y

ri2007 wrote:

enlightenment wrote:The question only states that x and y are integers. Therefore, substitute positive AND negative values and zero for x.

In statement 2: "-y>x" can also be written as "y<x>0" Simplify to get "y<-7x/2." Again try plugging positive and negative values for x. We get the same result as statement 2. Insufficient.

Combining Statements 1 and 2 they pretty much say the same thing as they do individually, only that statement 1 has a multiplier of 7/2. Statements 1 and 2 taken together are not sufficient. (E)


I always forget to check for +, -, and 0 on DS questions myself.

enlightenment, the question also says that both X & Y are greater than 0. So we cannot assume a -ve value for eithe x or y

wow...perfect example of why you should read the question stem completely.

now i am confused! please can someone tell me what is the correct answer to this one? Thanks!

Anonymous wrote:

enlightenment wrote:The question only states that x and y are integers. Therefore, substitute positive AND negative values and zero for x.

This is where the gap in logic is hitting me. The question states that x > 0. So why are you subbing in 0 and negatives when they don't exist for x?

Read above. I did not read the question stem correctly.

on a side note. i need to remember to turn the html in the post off. When you use < or > the forum thinks you are writing htmp tags and changes your text a little. And i really am not following what i wrote last night, either. I must have been pretty tired because i am some how mixing the two statements together. Sorry for the confusion.

Now, that the enlightened one has cleared the air about his post .. can we agree on an answer ?? .. what does thou say oh enlightened one .. B or E ..

gabriel wrote:Now, that the enlightened one has cleared the air about his post .. can we agree on an answer ?? .. what does thou say oh enlightened one .. B or E ..

B

B for me too ..