Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.
See classesLearn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.
Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.
with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep
Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.
with
Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.
Brent Thanks!I am all smiles.felt very good to receive a "good" word from you.Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:vinay1983's solution is perfect. The only numbers we can be certain are in the set are -2 , -5, -8, -11 . . . etc
I thought I'd mention that a lot of students make the mistake of reversing the conditional (if-then) statement in this question. The statement says "If if x is in the set, then x-3 is also in the set." Many students mistakenly believe that this also implies that "if x-3 is in the set, then x is also in the set." (these students end up concluding that 4 must be in the set)
This reversal is not logically sound. Here's an example why.
Let's say: If an animal is a rabbit, then that animal has ears.
Can we also conclude that, if an animal has ears then that animal is a rabbit? No.
In our question, the existence of x in the set guarantees the existence of x-3 in the set.
However, it is not necessarily the case that the existence of x-3 in the set guarantees the existence of x in the set.
Cheers,
Brent
