Ok, in order for anyone to give you the common factor of this, we need the format. is this -16x^2? If so, then the common factor would be x. x is the only thing that -16x^2, 1000x, and x have in common. If this were -16x^2 + 1000x + x =y then it would simplify to x(-16x+1001)=y. Ok, in order for anyone to give you the common factor of this, we need the format. is this -16x^2? If so, then the common factor would be x. x is the only thing that -16x^2, 1000x, and x have in common. If this were -16x^2 + 1000x + x =y then it would simplify to x(-16x+1001)=y.
Of course not. In fact, the greatest common factor of two odd numbers is never 2.-- 2 is never a factor of any odd number.-- The greatest common factor of the odd numbers 651 and 1,085 is 217.
Never. The least common factor of any set of positive integers is 1.
"Common" means "same for both". There's never anything 'common' about a single item, and in order to have 'common' factors, you need at least two numbers. Now, 9 is never a common factor of 20 and any other number, because 9 is not a factor of 20.
The least common factor of any set of integers is 1. 13 can never be an LCF.
The least common factor of any set of integers is 1.
It's never helpful to find the least common factor. The least common factor of any set of integers is 1.
Never.
Never.
No, the greatest common factor is never greater than the smallest number. The greatest common factor is the largest integer that divides evenly into all of the numbers listed.
Well, according to what I learned when I was in Algebra I, you should never have to use a semicolon.
Algebra?
The least common factor of any set of integers is 1. The least common multiple can never be smaller than the larger of the two starting numbers.