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
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget 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.

Exponent Simplification HELP PLS

Expert replies
by Kaunteya » Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:51 am
If 27^(4x + 2) × 162^(-2x) × 36^x × 9^(6–2x) = 1, then what is the value of x?


-9

-6

3

6

9

Holy crap this is retarded. How in the world are you to solve this in around 2 minutes without f-ing up. I love the GMAT!!!!

HELP
Kaunteya
Join the discussion
Source: — Problem Solving |

by joshi.komal » Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:35 pm
Hi Kaunteya,

Start off by simplifying all the terms in to their primary factors and then equate the powers of exponents on both sides of equation.

27^(4x + 2) * 162^(-2x) * 36^x * 9^(6–2x) = 1
or (3)^4(4x + 2) * (2*81)^(-2x) * (6*6)^x * 3^2(6–2x) = 1
or (3)^4(4x + 2) * (2)^(-2x) * (3)^4(-2x) * (3*2)^2x × 3^2(6–2x) = 1
or (3)^4(4x + 2) * (2)^(-2x) * (3)^(-8x) * (3)^2x*(2)^2x × 3^2(6–2x) = 1

or (3)^[4(4x + 2) +(-2x)+ 2x+2(6–2x)]* (2)^[(-2x)+2x] = 1
or (3)^[16x +8 -8x + 2x+12–4x]* (2)^[0] = 1
or (3)^[ 6x + 20] = 1 ^ 0 (anything raised to 0 is one)

now compare the powers on both sides
6x+ 20 = 0
or x = -20/6
or x ~ -3 :?
:shock:

Cross check your question and answer choices? Either one of them is incorrect.

Thanks
Komal
Join the discussion

by torontogmat.com » Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:38 pm
First, you do not need to solve it in 2 minutes. If you prepare well, some of the earlier questions can be solved easily, allowing you to remain CALM when you see a monstrosity like this question!

When you see complicated exponents, it's very likely that there will be some way to simplify.

In this case, the original:

27^(4x + 2) × 162^(-2x) × 36^x × 9^(6–2x) = 1

becomes:

3^3 to the (4x + 2) * 2*3^4 to the (-2x) * 4*3^2 to the x * 3^2 to the (6-2x) = 3^0

the 2^-2x in the second term and the 2^2x in the 3rd term (2^2 to the x) cancel each other, leaving an equation with all terms being 3 raised to a power.

the result is 12x + 6 + (-8x) + 2x + 12 - 4x = 0, which yields

2x + 18 = 0, so x = -9.


If the math looks tough, there's going to be a trick! Be confident, and keep plugging away.

Good luck!
Tony
Join the discussion

by Kaunteya » Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:44 pm
Hey Tony, thanks for the help on that question. I forgot to raise the 2 to the (-2x). So I was having quite the problem. Your approach was a hell of a lot faster than mine. Good help.

Kaunteya
Join the discussion