Interpretation of question

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:58 am
Thanked: 3 times

Interpretation of question

by svishal1123 » Sat May 16, 2009 9:58 am
I have a doubt on the interpretation of the question.

Here is a question from OG 11

If r and s are positive integers, is r/s an integer?

1. Every factor of s is also a factor of r.
2. Every prime factor of s is also a prime factor of r.

my answer was E based on below.

If the numbers are r=6 (2,3) and s=18 (2,3,3) - If we think that each DIFFERENT factor of s should be a factor of r, it satisfies the condition and the answer to the question is NO. If we exchange the values of r and s then also it satisfies condition 1 and answer would be YES. Hence 1 is not sufficient. Similar for Statement 2.
However, in OE, they have not considered the DIFFERENT. Statement 1 means that each individual factor of s is factor of r. By this r = 6 and s = 18 would not satisfy the condition 1. Condition 1 is sufficient for the answer. OA is A.
In OE, to prove that the satement 2 is not sufficient, they have taken r = 18(2,3,3) and s=8 (2,2,2). But for the factors of 8, they have considered only ONE 2, which means that it satisfies the statement 2. But if interpretation of statement 1 is applied to statement 2, 18(2,3,3) and 8(2,2,2) will not satisfy statement 2 because 8 has three 2's.
Hence the OA should be D.
Did I make myself clear??? What do you guys think?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:48 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:740

Re: Interpretation of question

by 2010gmat » Sat May 16, 2009 10:06 am
svishal1123 wrote:I have a doubt on the interpretation of the question.

Here is a question from OG 11

If r and s are positive integers, is r/s an integer?

1. Every factor of s is also a factor of r.
2. Every prime factor of s is also a prime factor of r.

my answer was E based on below.

If the numbers are r=6 (2,3) and s=18 (2,3,3) - If we think that each DIFFERENT factor of s should be a factor of r, it satisfies the condition and the answer to the question is NO. If we exchange the values of r and s then also it satisfies condition 1 and answer would be YES. Hence 1 is not sufficient. Similar for Statement 2.
here how come every factor of s is also a factor of r?? are 9 and 18 factors of 6?? Nopes...in each and every case where every factor of s is a factor r...r/s will be an iteger....stmnt 1 suff
However, in OE, they have not considered the DIFFERENT. Statement 1 means that each individual factor of s is factor of r. By this r = 6 and s = 18 would not satisfy the condition 1. Condition 1 is sufficient for the answer. OA is A.
In OE, to prove that the satement 2 is not sufficient, they have taken r = 18(2,3,3) and s=8 (2,2,2). But for the factors of 8, they have considered only ONE 2, which means that it satisfies the statement 2. But if interpretation of statement 1 is applied to statement 2, 18(2,3,3) and 8(2,2,2) will not satisfy statement 2 because 8 has three 2's.
Hence the OA should be D.
Did I make myself clear??? What do you guys think?

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:58 am
Thanked: 3 times

by svishal1123 » Sat May 16, 2009 10:47 am
WOW!!! How silly of me :(