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 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.

Age problem

Expert replies
by rupsk » Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:34 am
During one of the test I came across this problem but even after reading the explanation I am not able to understand it. Please help me I had picked up D as an answer while correct ans is E.

Ten years ago, scientists predicted that the animal z would become extinct in t years. What is t?

(1) Animal z became extinct 4 years ago.

(2) If the scientists had extended their extinction prediction for animal z by 3 years, their prediction would have been incorrect by 2 years.


My Explanation.
for (1): it says that "t" wud be six as if u take any value of current time then it will conclude for it.

For (2): also same logic and u can get precise ans.
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by Frankenstein » Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:55 am
Hi,
Prediction is different from extinction really hapepning
From(1):
Animal z extincted 6 years after the scientist made prediction. But, we do not know whether his prediction is correct.
If his prediction had been correct, t = 6 else not equal to 6
Not sufficient
From(2):
t+3 would be either 2 more or 2 less than the actual extinction time. WE cannot solve for t with this info.
Not sufficient

Both(1) and (2):
if t = 1, t+3 = 4 (2 less than 6)
if t = 5, t+3 = 8 (2 more than 6)
Not sufficient

Hence, E
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by rupsk » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:00 am
But for the (1) ho we can say that prediction is not correct, I mean it clearly says that it got extinct 4 years go so there is no question on it?
Join the discussion

by Frankenstein » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:07 am
rupsk wrote:But for the (1) ho we can say that prediction is not correct, I mean it clearly says that it got extinct 4 years go so there is no question on it?
Hi,
It extincted 6 years after he made prediction. But, we do not know if he had predicted t as 6 or not from the given info.
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by rupsk » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:19 am
Sorry but I am not able to understand your logic.
Join the discussion

by Frankenstein » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:37 am
rupsk wrote:Sorry but I am not able to understand your logic.
Hmm. You are assuming that the scientist predicted the extinction period accurately.
Let's say you predicted earthquake to occur in 2012. But, that earthquake occurred in 2020. So, in 2030, if I say that earth quake occurred in 2020 and that in 2011, you predicted the earth quake to occur. Based on my statements can anyone tell that you predicted to occur in 2020?
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by rupsk » Thu Jul 07, 2011 6:58 pm
Got it for first part can you elaborate second part also.
Join the discussion

by mirantdon » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:22 pm
it is something like when we consider t=0 for our frame of reference but we can define the absolute value of t . The question is something of that sort .It specifies one frame of reference (i.etime)
Join the discussion

by rupsk » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:43 pm
But still not more elaborative in perspective of second option. If possible please explain the second option in detail.
Join the discussion

by Frankenstein » Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:21 pm
rupsk wrote:Got it for first part can you elaborate second part also.
Hi,
Statement(2) is too general.
Consider statement(2) independently. Forget everything about statement(1) while considering statement(2)
From(2):
We do not know when the species were extinct. Moreover, for each value of extinction period, say k, we get two values for 't'.
t+3 = k+2 or k-2.
So, even by using both (1) and (2): we get t+3 = 6+2 or 6-2
So, t = 5 or 1
Not sufficient
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by rupsk » Sat Jul 09, 2011 6:39 am
Thanks. Finally got it
Join the discussion

by blackjack » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:28 am
I got trapped by (2) If the scientists had extended their extinction prediction for animal z by 3 years, their prediction would have been incorrect by 2 years.
I didn't realize that 'incorrect by 2 years' can mean +2 and -2. Moral of the story: read question stem very very carefully!
Join the discussion