Post your question in the Comment section below, and we’ll answer it as fast as humanly possible.

- Video Course
- Video Course Overview - READ FIRST
- General GRE Info and Strategies - 7 videos (all free)
- Quantitative Comparison - 7 videos (all free)
- Arithmetic - 42 videos (some free)
- Powers and Roots - 43 videos (some free)
- Algebra and Equation Solving - 78 videos (some free)
- Word Problems - 54 videos (some free)
- Geometry - 48 videos (some free)
- Integer Properties - 34 videos (some free)
- Statistics - 28 videos (some free)
- Counting - 27 videos (some free)
- Probability - 25 videos (some free)
- Data Interpretation - 24 videos (some free)
- Analytical Writing - 9 videos (all free)
- Sentence Equivalence - 39 videos (all free)
- Text Completion - 51 videos (some free)
- Reading Comprehension - 16 videos (some free)

- Study Guide
- Your Instructor
- Office Hours
- Extras
- Prices

## Comment on

Factorial Notation## I'm still not sure what you

## For the purposes of these

For the purposes of these videos, "stages" and "steps" can be used interchangeably. Sorry for any confusion.

## "Sorry for any confusion."

I already had a hunch (from the accent) you're canadian. That sealed the deal!

If it helps I wasn't confused by stages.

## Ha! Guilty as charged!

Ha! Guilty as charged!

Sorry about being Canadian :-)

## Am always confused with the

## Sure thing.

Sure thing.

Let's start with: 5! = 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1

We could also say: 5! = 5 x (a number that's 1 LESS THAN 5) x (a number that's 2 LESS THAN 5) x (a number that's 3 LESS THAN 5) x (a number that's 4 LESS THAN 5)

Or we might write: 5! = 5 x (5 - 1) x (5 - 2) x (5 - 3) x (5 - 4)

Likewise, n! = n x (a number that's 1 LESS THAN n) x (a number that's 2 LESS THAN n) x (a number that's 3 LESS THAN n) x (a number that's 4 LESS THAN n) x (a number that's 5 LESS THAN n) x . . .

Or we might write: n! = n x (n - 1) x (n - 2) x (n - 3) x (n - 4) x . . . . all the way down to . . . 2 x 1

Does that help?

## http://greprepclub.com/forum

I thought there will be 7 chairs in a row, on alternative chairs women will sitting W_W_W_W, left with 3 chairs in between.

W can sit in 24 different ways, M can sit 3! (6) different ways. totally 144 ways.

how can we assume this pattern _W_W_W_W_ ?

## Question link: http:/

Question link: http://greprepclub.com/forum/four-women-and-three-men-must-be-seated-in-...

Be careful. The question does NOT require us to keep the women separated. The question requires us to ensure that no two men are seated next to each other.

So, as you suggest, one possible arrangement is W_W_W_W, where we seat the 3 men in the 3 spaces.

HOWEVER, that's not the only scenario in which the men are separated.

Here's another _WW_W_ (place the 3 men in the 3 spaces)

And another _W_WW_ (place the 3 men in the 3 spaces)

And another _WW_W (place the 3 men in the 3 spaces)

.

.

.

etc

My solution considers all of the possible arrangements.

## Hi Brent... thanks for

## Question link: https:/

Question link: https://greprepclub.com/forum/four-women-and-three-men-must-be-seated-in...

Hi Angel,

That approach would take a VERY VERY long time.

The reason is that there are MANY MANY MANY different ways to break the rule that says "no two men can sit next to each other."

If we let the W, W, W, W, m, m, m represent the 4 women and 3 men, here are just a few of the ways that we can break the above rule:

- W.m.m.W.W.m.W

- W.m.W.W.W.m.m

- m.m.m.W.W.W.W

- W.m.W.m.m.W.W

- W.W.m.m.m.W.W

etc

There are MANY more configurations that break the rule.

So, as you can see, this approach is extremely time consuming.

Does that help?

Cheers,

Brent

## Add a comment