Sets - "what must be in the set?"

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:45 am
Thanked: 1 times

Sets - "what must be in the set?"

by ellexay » Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:39 pm
32. A set of numbers has the property that for any number t in the set, t + 2 is in the set. If –1 is in the set, which of the following must also be in the set?
I. –3 II. 1 III. 5
A. I only
B. II only
C. I and II only
D. II and III only
E. I, II, and III

Soln: Series property: t => t+2. (Note: for any given number N, ONLY N + 2 is compulsory. N - 2 is not a necessity as N could be the first term...this can be used as a trap.)
Given: -1 belongs to the series. => 1 => 3 =>5. DOES NOT imply -3.
Hence, II and III (D).


*****

I thought it was (B). I thought that since it didn't specify how many items are in the set, then I can't assume how extensive the set is in terms of the number of items...i.e., I can't assume that the set goes further than t+2. If that is the case, then 5 would not be absolutely necessary.

Thoughts? Where am I mistaken?
Source: — Problem Solving |

User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Thanked: 113 times
Followed by:27 members
GMAT Score:710

Re: Sets - "what must be in the set?"

by dmateer25 » Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:17 pm
ellexay wrote:32. A set of numbers has the property that for any number t in the set, t + 2 is in the set. If –1 is in the set, which of the following must also be in the set?
I. –3 II. 1 III. 5
A. I only
B. II only
C. I and II only
D. II and III only
E. I, II, and III

Soln: Series property: t => t+2. (Note: for any given number N, ONLY N + 2 is compulsory. N - 2 is not a necessity as N could be the first term...this can be used as a trap.)
Given: -1 belongs to the series. => 1 => 3 =>5. DOES NOT imply -3.
Hence, II and III (D).


*****

I thought it was (B). I thought that since it didn't specify how many items are in the set, then I can't assume how extensive the set is in terms of the number of items...i.e., I can't assume that the set goes further than t+2. If that is the case, then 5 would not be absolutely necessary.

Thoughts? Where am I mistaken?

According to the question for any number t in the set, t+2 is in the set.

so we know -1 is in the set, so -1 + 2 = 1 must be in the set.

Now we know 1 is in the set. So again, for any number t in the set t+2 is in the set. So 1 + 2 = 3 must also be in the set.

Now we know that 3 is in the set. So again, for any number t in the set t + 2 is in the set. So 3 + 2 = 5 must also be in set.

And this pattern will continue.