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.

Set K

Expert replies
by DevitaN » Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:32 am
Question:

K is a set of numbers such that

(i) if x is in K, then -x is in K, and

(ii) if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K


Is 12 in K?


(1) 2 is in K

(3) 3 is in K



Couldn't the set therefore be:

-6 -3 -2 0 2 3 6 ?? Which shows 12 isn't in set and it's easy to find a set with 12 in it.

Why is the correct answer C and not E. The books explanation was at most vague.

Thanks!
Join the discussion
Source: — Problem Solving |

by knight247 » Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:39 am
(1) Statement 1 says 2 is in k. Obviously implying that -2 is in k. So if 2 and -2 are in k then -4 also has to be in k(rememeber if x and y are in k then xy also is in k)
So, we have 2,-2 and -4. But this info is insufficient to prove 12 is in k.
(2)3 is in k. So -3 has to be in k. Also -9 has to be in k. So k has 3,-3 and -9. However, this is also insufficient to prove 12 is in k.

Combining both we know that k has 2,-2 -4 and 3,-3,-9. Consider the case of only -4 and -3. If x and y are in k then xy is in k. So if -4 and -3 are in k then (-4)*(-3)=12 will also be in k.
Hence C
Join the discussion

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:01 am
DevitaN wrote:
Couldn't the set therefore be:

-6 -3 -2 0 2 3 6 ?? Which shows 12 isn't in set and it's easy to find a set with 12 in it.
This set is incomplete.
Rule ii says that, if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K. So, since you have 2 and 6 in the set, it must also be true that (2)(6) is in the set. So, 12 is definitely in the set.

knight247's solution is great.

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Join the discussion

by DevitaN » Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:07 am
knight247 wrote:(1) Statement 1 says 2 is in k. Obviously implying that -2 is in k. So if 2 and -2 are in k then -4 also has to be in k(rememeber if x and y are in k then xy also is in k)
So, we have 2,-2 and -4. But this info is insufficient to prove 12 is in k.
(2)3 is in k. So -3 has to be in k. Also -9 has to be in k. So k has 3,-3 and -9. However, this is also insufficient to prove 12 is in k.

Combining both we know that k has 2,-2 -4 and 3,-3,-9. Consider the case of only -4 and -3. If x and y are in k then xy is in k. So if -4 and -3 are in k then (-4)*(-3)=12 will also be in k.
Hence C
Thanks

Forgive my stupidity, but couldn't x or y be -2 or 2? So x*y = -4 if y=2 and x=-2 or x=-2 and y=2. So by saying 12 must be in the equation, isn't that like saying xy*(Y (3 or -3) or X (3 or -3)) so it would be x*y^2?

So i suppose basically my question is why must either x or y be -4. I feel like in the end 12 can be in the equation and doesn't have to be in the equation, thereby proving insufficient.

Sorry again for my thick headedness. I appreciate you taking the time to help me with this!
Join the discussion

by DevitaN » Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:10 am
Brent@GMATPrepNow wrote:
DevitaN wrote:
Couldn't the set therefore be:

-6 -3 -2 0 2 3 6 ?? Which shows 12 isn't in set and it's easy to find a set with 12 in it.
This set is incomplete.
Rule ii says that, if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K. So, since you have 2 and 6 in the set, it must also be true that (2)(6) is in the set. So, 12 is definitely in the set.

knight247's solution is great.

Cheers,
Brent
Okay, so basically it's saying if 2 numbers are in a set, than their products are in the set...it's not having you specify an x and a y and ensuring their products are in the set? It's simply referring to any 2 numbers in the set?

If my statement is correct then I understand and thank you both!!
Join the discussion

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:16 am
DevitaN wrote:Forgive my stupidity, but couldn't x or y be -2 or 2? So x*y = -4 if y=2 and x=-2 or x=-2 and y=2. So by saying 12 must be in the equation, isn't that like saying xy*(Y (3 or -3) or X (3 or -3)) so it would be x*y^2?

So i suppose basically my question is why must either x or y be -4. I feel like in the end 12 can be in the equation and doesn't have to be in the equation, thereby proving insufficient.

Sorry again for my thick headedness. I appreciate you taking the time to help me with this!
Edit: Sorry, it looks like I was still writing this when you made your last post (which is absolutely correct)

There's no "thickheadedness" on your part. It's easy to confuse the roles that variables play in different settings.

The part where it says "if each of x and y is in K, then xy is in K" isn't assigning values to the variables x and y. It is using x and y to help phrase the rule.
This part could have been written without variables as well. If could have been written as "if there are two different numbers in set K, then it must also be true that the product of those two numbers is also in set K" This sentence is equivalent to the original sentence. It's just that the original version is more concise.

The point here is that we aren't saying that x and y are assigned certain values, we're just using the variables to better explain a rule.

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Join the discussion