Have questions about your preparation or an upcoming test? Need help modifying the Study Plan to meet your unique needs? No problem. Just book a Skype meeting with Brent to discuss these and any other questions you may have.
- Video Course
- Video Course Overview
- General GMAT Strategies - 7 videos (free)
- Data Sufficiency - 16 videos (free)
- Arithmetic - 38 videos
- Powers and Roots - 36 videos
- Algebra and Equation Solving - 73 videos
- Word Problems - 48 videos
- Geometry - 42 videos
- Integer Properties - 38 videos
- Statistics - 20 videos
- Counting - 27 videos
- Probability - 23 videos
- Analytical Writing Assessment - 5 videos (free)
- Reading Comprehension - 10 videos (free)
- Critical Reasoning - 38 videos
- Sentence Correction - 70 videos
- Integrated Reasoning - 17 videos
- Study Guide
- Office Hours
Comment on “Fixing” the Denominator
I think rather than using
I totally agree that that
I totally agree that that would save time.
I don't mention the Difference of Squares approach (found here https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-algebra-and-equation-solving/vid...), because many students follow the course as it's laid out in the Learning Guide, and those students haven't covered that lesson yet.
For the second question, why
That's totally valid. However
That's totally valid. However, once we get to (2√50)/15, we need to recognize that we can simplify this fraction further, since √50 = √(25 x 2) = √25 x √2 = 5√2
So, (2√50)/15 = 2(5√2)/15 = 2√2/3
What would be the conjugate of a denominator with 3 variables (e.g. 3+3√7-4√6)? Would that ever be asked?
Here's a video on
Here's a video on rationalizing the denominator when there are 3 terms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPtOMrrsoME
As you can see, the technique is far too time consuming to ever be part of a GMAT test. So, don't worry about it.