Best Answer

Two number are said to be "relatively prime" if they have no common factors - of course, other than the trivial factor 1. Even a Prime number is not "relatively prime" to itself, since the prime number itself is the common factor. For example, the common factor of 7 and 7 is 7. Thus, the only situation I can think of where a number has no common factor with itself is that the number is 1.

🙏

🤨

😮

Study guides

☆☆

Q: Can a number be relatively prime to itself?

Write your answer...

Submit

Still have questions?

Related questions

A number cannot be relatively prime number by itself. It can only be relatively prime in the context of (relativeto) another number. That requires the two numbers not to have any prime factors in common.

One number, by itself cannot be relatively prime - or otherwise. Relative primality is a property of two (or more) numbers.

One number, by itself cannot be relatively prime - or otherwise. Relative primality is a property of two (or more) numbers.

One number, by itself cannot be relatively prime - or otherwise. Relative primality is a property of two (or more) numbers.

No. A number by itself cannot be relatively prime. You need at least two numbers to say whether they are relatively prime or not, which is when their only common factor is 1.

Yes 29 is a prime number because it has only 2 factors which are itself and one

23 is relatively prime to all integers that aren't multiples of 23.

Any prime number is relatively prime to any other prime number.

Since 5 is a prime number, then any number, which is not a multiple of 5, is relatively prime with the number 5. You can determine if a number is a multiple of 5, by looking at the ones place digit. If it is a 0 or 5, and the number itself is not zero, then the number is a multiple of 5.

A number is relatively prime to another number or set of numbers when their GCF is 1.

25 and 36 are relatively prime because they both share 1 as a factor, but no other factor. As their only common factor is 1, they are relatively prime. Neither is a prime number itself, but it is about the common factors, so in relation to each other, they are relatively prime.

It can be. 16 is relatively prime with 25.

It can be. 27 is relatively prime to 28.

41 is relatively prime.

62 is not a prime number and you cannot get a relitavely prime number it either is a prime number or it isnt a prime number! The definition of a prime number is a number that can only be divided b itself and one. No other number 62 can be divided by 2 as well as itself and 1 so NO IT IS NOT A PRIME NUMBER even numbers tend not to be prime numbers because they can be divided by two the only even number that is prime is 2 because it can only be divided by itself and 1 I hope this helped!

no three is not a prime number

13 and 4 are relatively prime.

13 and 24 are relatively prime.

Two numbers are relatively prime if they have no factor in common. But a single number cannot be relatively prime.

A number is never relatively prime.Relatively prime refers to a pair of numbers.

They are not relatively prime. To be relatively prime, the only common factor they could have would be the number 1. Both also have the number 3 as a common factor, so they are not relatively prime.

A single number cannot be relatively prime. Relative primality is a property of two (or more) numbers which do not have any factor in common - other than 1.

No, 100 and 202 are not relatively prime. Relatively prime numbers only have the number 1 as a common factor. The number 1 is a common factor for them, but the number 2 is another common factor that they have, so they are not relatively prime.

11 is a prime number. For it to be relatively prime, it needs to be compared to another integer.

no three is not a Prime number