- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 5972
- Joined: Mar 25, 2011
- Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:19 pm
#44654
The initial scenario for the game is relatively simple:
The first rule establishes that no car can be the same color as the car next to it:
The C designation in the not-block above stands for “color.” The CC not-block is a shorthand notation that indicates that no two cars of similar color can be adjacent, as required by the first rule. This representation saves the time of writing out PP, GG, and OO not-blocks. Note that in a game with only six spaces, and only three colors, this is a significantly more inhibiting rule than might at first be suspected.
The second rule is relatively easy to represent:
The third and fourth rules are represented as Not Laws under the diagram. Of course, since there are only three colors, removing one color from the options leaves only two color possibilities for that car:
The rule that states that car 1 cannot be orange leads to the important Not Law that car 2 cannot be green. Let’s examine why this is the case, using the two scenarios for car 1:
An analysis of the diagram above reveals that the placement of the two P cars is restricted. Combining that with the first rule, the best approach is to attack the game by Identifying the Possibilities:
Three possibilities with P in 6:
Three possibilities with P in 5:
Thus, there are only six solutions to the game. With these solutions in hand, the questions are easy to attack.
- Setup and Rule Diagram Explanation
The initial scenario for the game is relatively simple:
The first rule establishes that no car can be the same color as the car next to it:
The C designation in the not-block above stands for “color.” The CC not-block is a shorthand notation that indicates that no two cars of similar color can be adjacent, as required by the first rule. This representation saves the time of writing out PP, GG, and OO not-blocks. Note that in a game with only six spaces, and only three colors, this is a significantly more inhibiting rule than might at first be suspected.
The second rule is relatively easy to represent:
The third and fourth rules are represented as Not Laws under the diagram. Of course, since there are only three colors, removing one color from the options leaves only two color possibilities for that car:
The rule that states that car 1 cannot be orange leads to the important Not Law that car 2 cannot be green. Let’s examine why this is the case, using the two scenarios for car 1:
- 1. Car 1 is green. If car 1 is green, then car 2 cannot be green.
2. Car 1 is purple. When car 1 is purple, then car 5 or 6 is also purple, and we can deduce that car 4 is orange. When car 4 is orange, then car 3 cannot be orange (from the rule that no two adjacent cars can be of the same color) and car 3 cannot be purple (because the two purple cars are either 1-5 or 1-6). Consequently, car 3 must be green. And, when car 3 is green, car 2 cannot be green.
An analysis of the diagram above reveals that the placement of the two P cars is restricted. Combining that with the first rule, the best approach is to attack the game by Identifying the Possibilities:
Three possibilities with P in 6:
Three possibilities with P in 5:
Thus, there are only six solutions to the game. With these solutions in hand, the questions are easy to attack.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Dave Killoran
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on X/Twitter at http://twitter.com/DaveKilloran
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/dave-killoran
PowerScore Podcast: http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/podcast/
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on X/Twitter at http://twitter.com/DaveKilloran
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/dave-killoran
PowerScore Podcast: http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/podcast/