If N is a prime number greater than 3, what is the remainder when N is divided by 12?
(A) 0
(B) 1
(C) 2
(D) 3
(E) 5
Prime number
This topic has expert replies
when a smaller integer is divided by a larger integer, the quotient is 0
so, I picked 5 as a prime number bigger than 3 and
using the following formula:
n = xq + r
plugging the numbers into it:
5=12 x 0 + r ---> remainder 5
am I correct?
so, I picked 5 as a prime number bigger than 3 and
using the following formula:
n = xq + r
plugging the numbers into it:
5=12 x 0 + r ---> remainder 5
am I correct?
Last edited by Carol on Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Ian Stewart
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2621
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:17 am
- Location: Montreal
- Thanked: 1090 times
- Followed by:355 members
- GMAT Score:780
Clearly both 1 and 5 are possible remainders, as are 7 and 11. There's something wrong with the question. What's the source?
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:44 am
- Thanked: 26 times
This is from a GMAT paper test. Answer is B. Did not make any sense to me and thats why I posted here to see if I was trapped.
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask
Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.
Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.
I would have faild as well...
according to the OA, I think:
the numerator must be greater than the dominator, for the quotient won't be zero!
again the formula:
n = xq + r
I chose 13 as the prime number greater than 3
and
13 = 12 x 1 + 1
I think this sounds correct this time. I think the question missed smth, they should have given us more data.
What do you think?
according to the OA, I think:
the numerator must be greater than the dominator, for the quotient won't be zero!
again the formula:
n = xq + r
I chose 13 as the prime number greater than 3
and
13 = 12 x 1 + 1
I think this sounds correct this time. I think the question missed smth, they should have given us more data.
What do you think?
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Ian Stewart
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2621
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:17 am
- Location: Montreal
- Thanked: 1090 times
- Followed by:355 members
- GMAT Score:780
There's nothing wrong with having a quotient of zero in this question. All we know is that N is greater than 3. Unless some information is missing from the question itself, or something has been mistranscribed, there isn't enough information here to give a unique answer- there are four possible answers (1, 5, 7, 11). If you replace the number '12' in the question with a '2', however, then the answer would be B, since you'd know N was odd. That's the only quick adjustment I can think to make to the question if we want the question to make any sense.Carol wrote: the numerator must be greater than the dominator, for the quotient won't be zero!
Carol,
Using your formula, It also works with 17 (prime number)
17 = 12 x 1 + 5 ... and therefore we have a different reminder.
Furthermore
25 = 12 x 2 + 1
So B should not be the answer because 25 is not a prime number.
Anyway this question sounds strange.
Using your formula, It also works with 17 (prime number)
17 = 12 x 1 + 5 ... and therefore we have a different reminder.
Furthermore
25 = 12 x 2 + 1
So B should not be the answer because 25 is not a prime number.
Anyway this question sounds strange.