Manhattan GMAT Forums Forum Index

Reply to topic
A certain jar contains only "b" black marbles
Harish Dorai
Guest


Reply with quote
A certain jar contains only "b" black marbles, "w" white marbles and "r" red marbles. If one marble is to be chosen at random from the jar, is the probability that the marble chosen is red greater than the probability that the marble chosen will be white?

1) r/(b+w) > w/(b+r)

2) b - w > r
Re: GMATPrep - Practice Test 2 - Problem #7
givemeanid
Guest


Reply with quote
Harish Dorai wrote:
A certain jar contains only "b" black marbles, "w" white marbles and "r" red marbles. If one marble is to be chosen at random from the jar, is the probability that the marble chosen is red greater than the probability that the marble chosen will be white?

1) r/(b+w) > w/(b+r)

2) b - w > r


The question asks whether r/(b+w+r) > w/(b+w+r) or in other words is r > w?

1. r(b+r) > w(b+w)
br + r^2 > bw + w^2
br - bw > w^2 - r^2
b(r-w) > (w-r)(w+r)
r-w > (w-r)(w+r)/b ----> We know b is positive. So, we can divide both sides without changing the inequality
r-w > k(w-r) ----> Where k > 0 as b,r and w are all positive
This is true only when r > w.
If r < w, left side is -ve and right side is +ve and the inequality doesn't hold.
SUFFICIENT.

2. b - w > r
b > w + r
This doesn't tell us anything about relationship between w and r.
INSUFFICIENT.

Answer is A.
A different way
Anadi
Guest


Reply with quote
Suppose total is T , T=r+b+w

r/(b+w) > w/(b+r)

r/(b+w+r-r) > w/(b+w+r-w)

r/(t-r) > w/(t-w)

Since t>r and t>w, we can cross multiply.

rt-rw > wt-rw

rt > wt

Since t > 0

r > w

So 1 is sufficient.

2 is obviously not sufficient.
Harish Dorai
Guest


Reply with quote
You guys are brilliant! The explanation makes perfect sense and the answer is (A).
givemeanid
Guest


Reply with quote
Anadi, I like your solution. Good thinking.
Stacey Koprince
MGMAT STAFF

Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 2590
Location: San Francisco
Reply with quote
You guys are all doing a great job here - you don't even need me! :)
Re: A different way
cracker
Guest


Reply with quote
adding +ve no r to lhs and w to rhs
proper frac behave properly
therefore
we have
2r/(b+r+w) > 2 w/(b +r+w)
divinding by +ve no 2

r/(b+r+w)[prob of red bll] > w/(b +r+w)[prob of white ball]

2 in insuffincent

hence ,A
A different way
k0nc3pt10n
Guest


Reply with quote
I like Anadi's method better than mine, but...

1) r/(b+w) > w/(b+r)
2)r/(b+w) + (b+w)/(b+w) > w/(b+r) + (b+r)/(b+r) ---> I added 1 to both sides inthe form of (b+w)/(b+w) & (b+r)/(b+r)
3)(r+b+w)/(b+w) > (r+b+w)/(b+r) ---> Next I cross multiply
4)(b+r)(r+b+w) > (r+b+w)(b+w) ---> divide out the (r+b+w)
5)(b+r) > (b+w) ---> It's pretty obvious now, but you can take away the b's if you want
6)r>w

Also I don't agree with crackers' math. Can anyone explain it better?
Guest



Reply with quote
A certain jar contains only "b" black marbles, "w" white marbles and "r" red marbles. If one marble is to be chosen at random from the jar, is the probability that the marble chosen is red greater than the probability that the marble chosen will be white?

P(red)=r/(b+w+r)
P(white)=w/(b+w+r)

P(red) > P (White) if r > w


1) r/(b+w) > w/(b+r)

gives
r/(b+w+r) > w/(b+w+r) [ this follows from: if A/B > C/D then A/(A+B) > C/(C+D) ]

hence r > w
Sufficient

2) b - w > r

Not Sufficient

I believe this also helps to explain cracker's method
A certain jar contains only "b" black marbles
All times are GMT - 5 Hours  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Reply to topic