Veritas Prep Question- Factors of Smallest Integers

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:22 am
If x is the smallest positive integer that is not prime and not a factor of 50!, what is the sum of the factors of x?

A) 51
B) 54
C) 72
D) 162
E) 50!+2

OA is D




The main reason I am posting this question is because I don't understand the reasoning that Veritas provided:
D. 50! is divisible by all the prime numbers less than 50, so you should recognize that the smallest prime number that's not a factor of 50! is 53 (remember, 51 may "look prime" but it's divisible by 3). But the question specifically says that x cannot be prime - so how can you take 53 and make it 'not prime' but 'still small'? Multiply it by the smallest possible factor that will accomplish that: 2. That gives you 106, a number that's clearly not prime (it's even) but that has as its only factors 1, 2, 53, and 106. That's as small a non-prime number as you can get that's not a factor of 50!, so that's x. And the sum of its factors is 162.

While your initial temptation might be to assume that the smallest such integer must be greater than 50!, you should catch yourself: that first integer above 50! is 50! + 1, and its factors must include 50! + 1 and 1. While that matches choice E, remember this - if those are indeed the only factors, then x would be prime (only factors: itself and 1) and that would violate the terms of the question. If that was your first hunch, catching that mistake is an entry point to do a little work with the significantly-smaller numbers in choices A through D.
Why wouldn't the smallest non-prime integer be 51 and the solution be B) 76?
Source: — Problem Solving |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:21 am
vrn2vw wrote: Why wouldn't the smallest non-prime integer be 51 and the solution be B) 76?
51 = (3)(17)

Now examine 50!
50! = (1)(2)(3)(4)(5).....(16)(17)(18).....(49)(50)

As we can see, 51 is a factor of 50!
We're looking for a value that is NOT a factor of 50!

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 7:01 am
Thanked: 2 times

by jain2016 » Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:33 am
Hi Experts ,

Can you please solve and explain this question?

Many thanks in advance.

SJ

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Wed Feb 17, 2016 9:00 am
jain2016 wrote:Hi Experts ,

Can you please solve and explain this question?

Many thanks in advance.

SJ
I offer a solution here: https://www.beatthegmat.com/problem-solv ... 87528.html
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Wed Feb 17, 2016 9:38 am
vrn2vw wrote:If x is the smallest positive integer that is not prime and not a factor of 50!, what is the sum of the factors of x?

A) 51
B) 54
C) 72
D) 162
E) 50!+2
We can see that 53 is NOT a factor of 50!, however, 53 is PRIME.
What about 106?
Since 106 = (53)(2), we know that 106 is not a factor of 50! AND we can see that 106 is not prime.

The question asks for the sum of the factors of x.
The factors of 106 are: 1, 2, 53 and 106
1 + 2 + 53 + 106 = 162

Answer: D

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
Elite Legendary Member
Posts: 10392
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Thanked: 2867 times
Followed by:511 members
GMAT Score:800

by [email protected] » Wed Feb 17, 2016 10:21 am
Hi Jain2016,

50! = (1)(2)(3)(4)....(48)(49)(50)

50! is clearly divisible by LOTS of different integers. Besides the 50 integers listed above, ANY integer that can be created by multiplying any of those values (or their factors) will divide into 50!

For example:
(2) and (49) are both factors of 50!, so (2)(49) = 98 will ALSO be a factor of 50!.

The question asks us to find the SMALLEST positive integer that is NOT PRIME and NOT a factor of 50! Once we have that value, we have to figure out the sum of its factors.

Rather than try to list out all of the possible factors of 50!, we have to think about the type of number that is NOT a factor of 50! If we think about prime-factorization, we'll find that the smallest prime factor in 50! is 2 (it can be found in ALL of the even integers). Similarly, we can find '3' in all of the multiples of 3 (3, 6, 9, etc.) and we can find '5' in all of the multiples of 5 (5, 10, 15, etc.). The largest prime factor in 50! is 47; to find a number that is NOT a factor of 50!, we have to find one that includes a prime factor that is NOT a factor of 50!

The next largest prime number above 47 is 53. 53 is NOT a factor of 50! and we cannot 'get to' 53 by multiplying any of the factors of 50! The prompt tells us that we need a number that is NOT prime though - the smallest number that has 53 as a factor and is NOT prime is 106 (which is 2x53). THAT is the smallest number that fits all of the restrictions that we're given.

From there, we know two of the factors of 106 already: 1 and 106, so the sum has to be GREATER THAN 106. The only answer among the 5 choices that makes any sense is....

Final Answer: D

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image

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

by Matt@VeritasPrep » Thu Feb 18, 2016 6:16 pm
jain2016 wrote:Hi Experts ,

Can you please solve and explain this question?

Many thanks in advance.

SJ
For a positive integer NOT to be a factor of 50!, it must have some prime factor that is not a factor of 50!. The smallest such prime is 53.

Further, our integer CANNOT be prime. So it must be a MULTIPLE of the smallest prime number that isn't a factor of 53. The smallest positive multiple of 53 that isn't 53 itself is 106, so this is our number.

The factors of 106 are 1, 2, 53, and 106, so their sum is 162, and we're done!