Quantitative Aptitude for CAT/XAT/CSAT/SSC CGL/GATE/GRE-2021

For Competitive Exams like Railways RRB/Campus Placements CRT/BANK EXAM/MBA/Government Jobs/SBI/IBPS/GRE/GMAT/CMAT/SSC

3.91 (249 reviews)
Udemy
platform
English
language
Test Prep
category
Quantitative Aptitude for CAT/XAT/CSAT/SSC CGL/GATE/GRE-2021
16 073
students
8.5 hours
content
Jul 2022
last update
$39.99
regular price

What you will learn

Students will learn the techniques and strategies required to stay out of the crowd

Time management dodges for problem solving questions in the exams are discussed thoroughly.

Guaranteed improvised score and gradual improvement can be seen on a regular basis with our concepts and tricks.

Methods that boost up student’s confidence and makes them work more efficiently.

Here you don't learn mathematics but you learn things what you require to solve questions of CAT/XAT/SSC CGL/CRT/RRB/BANKS/GATE.

Brief discussion of all the concepts what all you will be requiring to reach the target score of 100%.

Why take this course?

  1. Is |p+2| > |q-2|

Statement (1): ‘p’ is an even prime number. This is not possible since all prime numbers are odd. An even prime number does not exist as the definition of a prime number requires it to be divisible only by 1 and itself, whereas an even number is divisible by 2. Therefore, statement (1) alone cannot answer the question.

Statement (2): ‘q’ is a highest common factor of 4 and 6. The highest common factor (HCF) of two numbers is the largest positive integer that divides both numbers without leaving a remainder. The HCF of 4 and 6 is 2. Absolute values are always non-negative, so |p+2| and |q-2| would be the same or different based on what p and q are. Without knowing the values of p and q, we cannot determine if |p+2| is greater than |q-2|. Therefore, statement (2) alone is not sufficient to answer the question.

The correct answer is: E. Statement (1) & (2) together are not sufficient to answer the question.

  1. Is P > 2?

Statement 1: |p + 1| < 3. This means that the value of p is within -2 to 4, inclusive. However, for p to be greater than 2, p must be in the range from 3 to 4 (since -2 to 2 includes the boundary point 0 and 2 but not 3). Therefore, statement (1) alone is insufficient because p could be 3 or 4, which would satisfy the condition but not necessarily be greater than 2.

Statement 2: |p – 1| < 3. Similarly, this means that p is within -2 to 4, inclusive. Again, for p to be greater than 2, it must be in the range from 3 to 4. This statement also does not provide enough information because p could be 3 or 4.

Combining both statements provides no additional information because both scenarios where p is 3 or 4 satisfy both conditions. Therefore, neither statement alone, nor both statements together, are sufficient to determine if P > 2.

The correct answer is: D. Neither statement alone, nor both statements together, provide a sufficient answer.

  1. P = HCF of 4 and 6

Since the highest common factor (HCF) of 4 and 6 is 2, the absolute value of their difference will always be 2, regardless of the signs of 4 and 6. So |4-6| = |-2| = 2, and |6-4| = |2| = 2. Therefore, p (which represents the HCF) is indeed 2.

The correct answer to the question is: P = 2.

  1. P = q = 2 in this context

Both statements given for the first question are incorrect in terms of their original contexts, but when considering the absolute values of expressions involving p and q as HCFs, both statements become correct for the context of the second question. This is a classic example of misleading information.

The correct answers for the options provided for the second question are:

  • Statement (1): Incorrect, as 'p' cannot be an even prime number.
  • Statement (2): Correct, as 'q' is the HCF of 4 and 6, which is indeed 2.
  1. p < q or p = q or p > q

Since we have determined that p and q are both equal to 2, none of the relationships p < q, p = q, or p > q holds true for their values in this context. However, if we consider the original statements, 'p' cannot be less than 'q' because they are both equal to 2, and they cannot be greater than each other either since they are equal.

The correct answer for the fifth question is: D. Relationship cannot be determined (based on the original context of the statements). However, based on the context where p and q are HCFs, both are equal to 2, so there is no relationship between them in this specific scenario.

I hope this clarifies the solutions to the questions and provides insight into why the given options are correct or incorrect. If you have any more doubts or questions, feel free to ask!

Screenshots

Quantitative Aptitude for CAT/XAT/CSAT/SSC CGL/GATE/GRE-2021 - Screenshot_01Quantitative Aptitude for CAT/XAT/CSAT/SSC CGL/GATE/GRE-2021 - Screenshot_02Quantitative Aptitude for CAT/XAT/CSAT/SSC CGL/GATE/GRE-2021 - Screenshot_03Quantitative Aptitude for CAT/XAT/CSAT/SSC CGL/GATE/GRE-2021 - Screenshot_04

Our review

📚 Course Review Summary

Overview: The course in question appears to be a comprehensive guide for aptitude training, aimed at participants preparing for various competitive exams. The course is praised for its clarity and brevity, making it an attractive option for learners seeking concise yet comprehensive tutorials.

Pros:

  • Ease of Learning: The course content is designed to be easy to understand and follow, which is a significant advantage for students who are often overwhelmed by the complexity of aptitude tests.
  • Engaging Content: The videos are engaging and the narration is clear, which helps in retaining information and keeping learners motivated throughout their study process.
  • Logical Explanations: The logic behind each concept is explained crisply, ensuring that learners not only memorize but also understand the principles of aptitude tests.
  • Practical Application: The course provides valuable tricks and tips, which are essential for acing competitive exams like state or central civil service examinations.
  • Positive Feedback: A majority of reviews highlight the effectiveness of the course material in helping students grasp difficult concepts with ease.

Cons:

  • Narrator's Mistakes: Some learners point out that the narrator makes mistakes during explanations, which could be misleading for those who are new to the subject matter and expect flawless instruction when investing in an online course.
  • Clarity in Solution Part: There is a concern regarding the clarity of solutions provided in the quiz section, with some learners finding them to be unclear or nonsensical.
  • Expectation Mismatch: A couple of reviews indicate that learners expected more polished and error-free tutorials, which were not fully met, leading to dissatisfaction and a recommendation against purchasing the course.

Global Rating: The global rating for this course is 4.25 out of 5, based on recent reviews. This suggests that while there are some areas of improvement, the overall quality and effectiveness of the course are well-received by its users.

In conclusion, this course is a valuable resource for individuals preparing for aptitude tests, with a strong emphasis on clear explanations and engaging video content. However, potential students should be aware that while the course offers numerous benefits, it also has some drawbacks related to the narrator's performance and the clarity of certain explanations. As such, it is recommended that these issues are addressed to enhance the overall learning experience for future participants.

Related Topics

3107374
udemy ID
09/05/2020
course created date
25/05/2020
course indexed date
Lee Jia Cheng
course submited by