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

Redeem

Approach

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Source: — Problem Solving |
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sat May 07, 2016 5:31 am
For any positive integer n the length is defined as the number of prime numbers whose product equals n. So for 75 the length is 3 since 75 = 3 * 5 * 5. How many 2-digit numbers have a length of 6?

a) None
b) One
c) Two
d) Three
e) Four
Start with smallest possible prime factors:
2*2*2*2*2*2 = 64.
2*2*2*2*2*3 = 96.
Since the product must be less than 100, only the two numbers above are possible. If we increase any of the factors, the product will be greater than 100.

The correct answer is C.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Top

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] » Sat May 07, 2016 9:08 am
Hi eitijan,

When deciding how to approach a GMAT question, it's important to take advantage of ALL of the information presented. Here, you'll notice that the answer choices are SMALL, meaning that there can only be 0 to 4 possible numbers that fit the description given in the prompt. We're told to multiply 6 prime numbers together and get a total that is only 2 digits (less than 100). There just can't be that many ways for that to happen (and we know there's not, from the answer choices). From here, rather than trying to randomly find numbers that fit, we have to work in reverse and think about what multiplying primes together would get us. The other explanations show you the specific numbers, so I won't rehash that here.

The take-away from this prompt is that you should keep your thinking flexible. Be ready to come up with ways to deal with the problem that aren't what you learned in "math class." That way of thinking is essential to scoring at a high level on the GMAT.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 10:53 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:780

by 800_or_bust » Sat May 07, 2016 11:34 am
eitijan wrote:How to approach such questions?
Hmmm... This is an example of a "strange operator" question, as they call them on the GMAT Prep Now video series. I can't think of any way to approach this other than to test all possibilities, starting with the smallest. This is a question that at first glance looks challenging, but is really fairly easy.

The smallest possible product of six prime factors is 2^6, which is 64. This is a two-digit number.

The next smallest is (2^5)(3), which is 96. This is a two-digit number.

The next smallest is (2^4)(3^2), which is 144. This is a three-digit number. Since no other product of six prime factors can possibly be less than this value, we can stop testing here.

The answer is C.
800 or bust!
Top
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 May 12, 2016 12:28 am
I'd say test the cases. The answers imply that there aren't very many, so we'd start from the smallest (2�), then work our way up: 2� * 3, 2� * 3², ...

Luckily for us, not even 2� * 3² works, so we're done pretty quickly.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1