Last visit was: 22 Dec 2024, 09:15 It is currently 22 Dec 2024, 09:15

Close

GRE Prep Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GRE score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30461
Own Kudos [?]: 36816 [8]
Given Kudos: 26100
Send PM
Most Helpful Community Reply
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 10 Aug 2018
Posts: 33
Own Kudos [?]: 49 [6]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
General Discussion
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2019
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 03 Nov 2019
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: |3 + 3x| < –2x [#permalink]
2
So, you have good reasoning up to the point where you solve for both scenarios:
X < -3/5
AND
X > -3
Now here's where you are getting it a bit twisted: BOTH CONDITIONS MUST BE MET, NOT ONLY ONE.
So, values of X go from -3 to -3/5 (not including). Or in mathematical terms: X = (-3,-3/5)

Please see the image attached.
I hope this helps!

P.S: I have no idea why I can't quote the comment of einalemjs...
Attachments

Possible values of X.jpg
Possible values of X.jpg [ 9.87 KiB | Viewed 6545 times ]

avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 03 Nov 2019
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: |3 + 3x| < –2x [#permalink]
[

Please see my response above...
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2019
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: |3 + 3x| < –2x [#permalink]
2
Why is it that both scenarios must be true? I thought when you take an absolute value, you are either reversing the negative or leaving it as it was... but it can't be both negative and positive at once. Meaning, while it's useful to know both possible scenarios, it's not actually possible that they both occur simultaneously, since it can only be one OR the other. So what is the reasoning behind that?

It's not like finding the roots of a quadratic or accounting for positive/negative roots, where both are correct. It's a way of accounting for uncertainty in absolute value, but in this case it is either one case or the other, because the starting value could not have been both cases at once.

Given all of this, answer choice D makes the most sense, since it's possible that the |x| is less than, equal to, or greater than 4.

I really don't see how this is faulty reasoning. I hope someone can explain!

EDiT: I think I understand now, from doing more questions. It seems there's nothing wrong with my reasoning--the variables can't be both cases at once. But we're not precisely talking about the sign of the variable, but rather the output of the absolute value sign. Further, since we're dealing with inequalities, the values can satisfy both conditions. In the context of absolute value, since the resulting quantity will always be positive for the same inputs, the variable must satisfy the inequalities of both positive and negative values.

Thanks! Resolved.
Posted from my mobile device Image
GRE Instructor
Joined: 24 Dec 2018
Posts: 1066
Own Kudos [?]: 1432 [1]
Given Kudos: 24
Send PM
Re: |3 + 3x| < 2x [#permalink]
1
\(|3+3x| < -2x\)

We replace what is inside the modulus sign with the positive and the negative of what is inside, as both expressions can satisfy the inequality.

\(3 + 3x < -2x\)

\(-(3+3x)< -2x\)

We solve for \(x\), in each inequality.

The first inequality

\(3+3x < -2x\)

\(3+3x+2x<0\)

\(3+5x < 0\)

\(5x<-3\)

\(x<-3/5\)

The second inequality

\(-(3+3x) <-2x\)

\(-3-3x < -2x\)

\(-3-3x+2x<0\)

\(-3-x<0\)

\(-3<x\)

\(x> -3\)

Therefore, \(x\) lies between \(-3\) and \(-3/5\). Then \(|x|\) lies between \(3/5\) and \(3\), both of which are less than \(4\). Therefore, Quantity B is always greater.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2023
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: |3 + 3x| < 2x [#permalink]
Here (3+3x)<-2x is considered when we assume the value of x>0.

But the answer of this inequality is x<-3/5 which does not satisfy the condition of x>0.

Can anyone please clear this doubt of mine.

Posted from my mobile device
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30461
Own Kudos [?]: 36816 [0]
Given Kudos: 26100
Send PM
|3 + 3x| < 2x [#permalink]
Expert Reply
In this scenario you consider that, essentially, x < a or x > -a

our x is what we do have inside the module
Prep Club for GRE Bot
|3 + 3x| < 2x [#permalink]
Moderators:
GRE Instructor
88 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
37 posts
Moderator
1115 posts
GRE Instructor
234 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne