Q: Is 108 and 57 relatively prime?

Write your answer...

Submit

Still have questions?

Continue Learning about Math & Arithmetic

No, 57 and 96 are not relatively prime because they share a common factor of 3.

No. Both 57 and 111 are composite numbers. Factors of 57 are 1, 3, 19 and 57. Factors of 111 are 1, 3, 37 and 111. They share two factors 1 and 3, so they are not relatively prime either.

No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.

51 + 57 = 108

108 is not prime. 108 = 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 3

Related questions

No, 42 and 108 are not relatively prime. Two even numbers cannot be relatively prime.

No, 57 and 96 are not relatively prime because they share a common factor of 3.

No, they can both be divided by two. No two even numbers can be relatively prime.

No. Both 57 and 111 are composite numbers. Factors of 57 are 1, 3, 19 and 57. Factors of 111 are 1, 3, 37 and 111. They share two factors 1 and 3, so they are not relatively prime either.

No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.

57 an 100 are relatively co-prime, i.e. they share no factors other than 1 between them, so 57 over 100 is already in simplest form.

108 is not prime. It is composite. 54 goes into 108 twice. No even number, other than 2 is prime.

51 + 57 = 108

108 is not prime. 108 = 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 3

No, they are not relatively prime.

It can be. 34 is relatively prime to 35. 34 is not relatively prime to 40.

25 is relatively prime with 36. 25 is not relatively prime with 35.