NOTE: I'm assuming S2 is written incorrectly, and that it's supposed to say s_k = (s_(k-1))/3; in other words, that each term in the sequence is equal to the preceding term, divided by 3. Without that assumption, the problem seems unanswerable.
S1 gives us a relationship between two specific terms in the sequence. Let s5 = y and s4 = x. We have
y = x/(x-3)
Two variables, one equation - insufficient.
S2 defines the sequence. Since this describes the relationship between any two consecutive terms in the sequence, we can let sk = s5 = y and s(k-1) = s4 = x. We have
y = x/3
Again, two variables, one equation - insufficient.
Taking the two together, y = x/(x-3) and y = x/3, so
x/(x-3) = x/3
3x = x(x-3)
3x = x² - 3x
0 = x² - 6x
0 = x(x-6)
Since all the terms are positive, x is 6. That means the fourth term of the sequence is 6. Working backwards, if each term is equal to the preceding term divided by 3:
s4 = 6
s3 = 18
s2 = 72
So the two statements together are sufficient.
A sequence of positive numbers
This topic has expert replies
Source: Beat The GMAT — Problem Solving |
-
Matt@VeritasPrep
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2630
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 3:32 pm
- Location: East Bay all the way
- Thanked: 625 times
- Followed by:119 members
- GMAT Score:780
