No.
No.
573, aka 1*573. 1146, aka 2*573. 1719, aka 3*573. Are you sensing a pattern here?
For a number to be divisible by 3, its digit sum has to be divisible by 3. For a number not to be divisible by 2, the last digit must be a 1,3,5,7 or 9. Using these rules, the numbers between 500 and 600 that divide by 3 but not 2 become clear: 501, 507, 513, 519, 525, 531, 537, 543, 549, 555, 561, 567, 573, 579, 585, 591 and 597
yes any number that ends in 5 or 0 is evenly divisble by 5 2865/5=573
No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.
2 is not divisible by 19008. 19008 is divisible by 2.
351 is not divisible by 2. 2 is not divisible by 351.
2 is not divisible by 972. 972 is divisible by 2.
2 is not divisible by 870. 870 is divisible by 2.
Of course not ! The answer is right within your question: 2 is divisible by 2 but 2 is not divisible by ... (can you dig it ?)
no.. for example 6,12,18 are divisible by 2..but not divisible by 8.
416 is divisible by 2 but is not divisible by 3.