BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Need help with negative inequality

Expert replies
by ildude02 » Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:05 pm
If x is an integer, what's the value of X?

1)1/5 < 1/(x+1) < 1/2
2)(x-3)(x-4) = 0;

I have solved this question to find the answer, but I have a question with regards to how I solved statement 1 and wanted to hear your thoughts.

For statement 1, (x+1) can either be positve or negative, so if (x+1) is postive, we dont need to worry abt the reversing the inequalities, so we get, 1 < x < 4;

When we consider (x+1) being negative, this is where I wanted to get your input;

Can we just substitue (x+1) with -(x+1) and try to solve the inequality? as in; 1/5 < 1/-(x+1) < 1/2 . Is that OK? Or, do we need to reverse the inequality and leave the (x+1) as in; 1/5 > 1/(x+1) > 1/2; Solving both the possibilites obviously give different values.
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by wilderness » Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:45 am
Hi,

I think we do not need to take -ve into consideration for (1) because it says 1/(x+1) is between 1/5 and 1/2 i.e 1/(x+1) is between 0.2 and 0.5. So its not negative.

IMHO the best way to solve 1 is just invert the equations and change the signs (Is there any rule that forbids us from doing so ?? )
Then we have simply 5 > (x+1) > 2
hence 4 > x > 1

The answer is C.
Join the discussion

by Ian Stewart » Tue Jul 08, 2008 5:23 am
wilderness wrote: IMHO the best way to solve 1 is just invert the equations and change the signs (Is there any rule that forbids us from doing so ?? ) .
You can certainly do this if you know everything is positive. If x and y are positive, and you have the inequality:

1/x < 1/y

then you can multiply both sides by xy to get:

y < x

We don't need to worry about whether to reverse the inequality, provided we know that x and y are both positive. The same is true if x and y are both negative: then xy is positive, so we can multiply by xy without reversing the inequality. You do need to be careful, however, when x and y have opposite signs. Then, when you multiply by xy, you are multiplying by a negative, and you must reverse the inequality. If, say:

1/x < 1/y

then x could be negative, and y positive, and we have, multiplying by xy and reversing the inequality:

y > x

So yes, there is a rule one can follow here- but you need to be very careful if you don't know the signs of x and y.
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
Join the discussion

by wilderness » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:30 am
Thanks. You just keep amazing me with your tips.
Join the discussion

by ildude02 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:11 am
I missed it, you are gith that we dont need to consider (x+1) < 0 since it will not satify the given inequality. Thanks.

But my main question was, if we do need to consider one, can we just substitue the variable x+1 with -(x+1) and continue solving the inequality to find the upper an dtjhe lower limit? Appreciate your response.
wilderness wrote:Hi,

I think we do not need to take -ve into consideration for (1) because it says 1/(x+1) is between 1/5 and 1/2 i.e 1/(x+1) is between 0.2 and 0.5. So its not negative.

IMHO the best way to solve 1 is just invert the equations and change the signs (Is there any rule that forbids us from doing so ?? )
Then we have simply 5 > (x+1) > 2
hence 4 > x > 1

The answer is C.
Join the discussion

by AleksandrM » Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:32 am
Hey, I ended up with:

1) 10/(x + 1) - 5 < 0

2) x = 3 x = 4

Both: If x = 4, then 1) does not hold true. If x = 3, then 1 holds true.

And so I went with C.

Is my approach correct?
Join the discussion

by jay2007 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:36 am
Solving the first in equality i get the values of x as 3 or 4

1/5 < 1/(x+1) means, x=1,2,3,4,0
1/(x+1) < 1/2 means, x=3,4,5,..... or -2, -3, -4....

So, x should be 3 or 4

Solving the second equation i get the values of x as 3 or 4.

So, my answer is E.


What is the OA?
Join the discussion

by AleksandrM » Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:50 am
jay,

For the first one, you cannot cross-multiply because you do not know the sign of x, therefore you do not know whether to "flip" the inequality sign or not.
Join the discussion

by zakir » Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:15 pm
I would do this as-
From 1st equation:
(x+1)<5, so x <4>2, so x>1
x can be either 2 or 3

From 2nd equation:
x=3, or x=4

Combining 1st and 2nd, x=3.

So the correct answer is C.

(x is not negative, as that would make 1st equation untrue)
Join the discussion

by lunarpower » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:48 pm
AleksandrM wrote:Hey, I ended up with:

1) 10/(x + 1) - 5 < 0

2) x = 3 x = 4

Both: If x = 4, then 1) does not hold true. If x = 3, then 1 holds true.

And so I went with C.

Is my approach correct?
nope; you left off the left side of the double inequality in statement 1. your version (10/(x+1) - 5 < 0) is a rearrangement of 1/(x+1) < 1/2; you've completely neglected the fact that, per the original problem statement, 1/(x+1) is also greater than 1/5.
this observation totally changes the game, because a number that's stuck between 1/5 and 1/2 must be positive; with just the listed half of the inequality, you can't determine whether 1/(x+1) is positive or negative.

because everything in the double inequality is positive, you can just go ahead and take reciprocals of everything. (RULE: if everything is positive or everything is negative, you can take reciprocals of everything and flip all the inequality signs around.)
this yields 5 > x+1 > 2, or, more traditionally, 2 < x+1 < 5.
therefore, 1 < x < 4.

your rephrase of (2) is correct.

therefore, the answer is still c, although not quite for the reasons you've listed.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Join the discussion