(1) We know that the number of multiples of 3 in T is at least 6, . However, we cannot establish an upper bound on the number of multiples of 3 in T NOT SUFF
(2) says nothing about the number of multiples of 3 in T, as it is possible that there is a infinite number of multiples of 3 in T. For example, if T were the set of all positive integers, T would have an infinite number of multiples of k (k could be any positive integer)
(T) Nothing in the two statments implies or precudes the existence of an infinite number of multiples of 3

For example: (3,6,9,12,15,18,4,3,8,6,12,9,16,12,20,15,...)

AND (3,6,9,12,15,18,4,8,4,8,4,8,4,8,4,...)

IMO E

The first statement produces no finite result on multiples of T. Hence, not sufficient.
The second statement says about multiples of 4 but we are looking for multiple of 3'

Combined, again, there is no finite reult of multiples of 3 in the set T.

Whats the OA?

So here, because we can't assume that the first statement means that there would be finite nos . I would go for E