17 and 68 are not relatively prime because they have 17 as a common factor.
Yes, they are relatively prime.
Yes, 11 and 51 are relatively prime.
To be relatively prime requires another number, and the highest common factor between 17 and that number must be 1. 17 is relatively prime to all numbers which are not multiples of 17 (since 17 is a prime number).
11 is a prime number. For it to be relatively prime, it needs to be compared to another integer.
Yes, 13 and 17 are relatively prime.
17 and 68 are not relatively prime because they have 17 as a common factor.
Yes, they are relatively prime.
Yes, they are relatively prime.
Yes. 11 is prime. 98 is not prime, but it is not divisible by 11, so the two are relatively prime.
Yes, 11 and 51 are relatively prime.
No, they are not relatively prime.
To be relatively prime requires another number, and the highest common factor between 17 and that number must be 1. 17 is relatively prime to all numbers which are not multiples of 17 (since 17 is a prime number).
11 is a prime number. For it to be relatively prime, it needs to be compared to another integer.
No. They both have 17 as a prime factor - 374 = 2 x 11 x 17
Two numbers are relatively prime (co-prime) if they have no common factor other than 1; that is their highest common factor (hcf) is 1. If one of the numbers is prime, then the two are relatively prime if the prime is not a factor of the other. 11 is a prime. If 11 divides into 181345913, then their hcf is 11 and the two are NOT relatively prime. If 11 does not divide into 181345913 then their hcf is 1 and they are co-prime. A simple test for divisibility by 11: Sum of digits in odd position: 1+1+4+9+3 = 18 Sum of digits in even position: 8+3+5+1 = 17 Difference between the two sums = 18-17 = 1 If this difference is divisible by 11 then so is the original number. The difference is not so 11 is not a factor of 181345913 and the two numbers are relatively prime.
Yes, they are relatively prime.