![Image](https://s2.postimage.org/Fek8A.jpg)
OA is [spoiler]A.
I just cant get the hang of this sum. I understood the reason for the OA but why is the second statement insufficient?
Please help![/spoiler]
I used a similar approach with a more "qualitative" understanding, rather than resorting to 2n+1:shovan85 wrote:As per B:
(k+1) / 3 is an odd number.
A general odd number can be written as 2n+1 where n is a number.
So (k+1) / 3 = 2n+1
=> k+1 = 6n+3
=> k = 6n + 2.
So the possible values of k = 2,8,14,...
When k = 2, (k+2) is divisible by 4 so the whole expression is div by 4
When k = 8, (K+2) is 10 divisible by 2 so the other part should be either div by 2 or 4 to get the whole expression as a multiple of 4. The other part (k^2+4K+3) if you put k = 8 it will be 99 not div by 2 or 4. So the whole expression is not div by 4.
Thus we can say Insufficient.
k is div by 8 that means we can write k = 8x (where x is an integer).novel wrote:could some one please tell me how is 1 sufficient...
thank you very muchshovan85 wrote:k is div by 8 that means we can write k = 8x (where x is an integer).novel wrote:could some one please tell me how is 1 sufficient...
Now put it in the Eqn: (k+2)*(k^2+4K+3) = (8x+2) * (64x^2 + 32x +3)
8x+2 is a multiple of 2 not 4. You can verify by putting some integer values of x/
x=0 8x+2 = 2
x=1 8x+2 = 10
.. ..
(64x^2 + 32x +3) the first two parts are clearly divisible by 4 as 64x^2 is a multiple of 4 and 32x is a multiple of 4.
So we can say 64x^2 + 32x is multiple of 4.
Now to a multiple of 4 if u add 3 then it will NEVER be a multiple of 4.
Thus sufficiently says 1 is not divisible by 4.
Hope this makes sense. Let me know if any further doubts.