The unit digits are 2/4/6/8/0
You can tell if the number ends in either 5 or 0
If last two digits of a number are divisible by 4 then number is a multiple of 4 for a number with more than 21 digit
Oh, dude, like, totally! So, to check if a number is a multiple of 4, you just need to see if it's divisible by 4 without any remainder. And guess what? 58 is not divisible by 4 because if you divide 58 by 4, you get 14 with a remainder of 2. So, in short, 58 is not a multiple of 4.
The number 12 has 4 and 6 as factors so 12 is a multiple of 4 and 6.
No - a smaller number can never be a multiple of a number, only a factor. But 4 is not a factor of 62, either.
Yes. You can always tell if a number is divisible by 4 by looking at the last 2 digits. In this case, 36 (4 times 9) is a multiple of 4, so 3736 is also. This is because the difference between a number and the last 2 digits (in this case, 3700) is always a multiple of 100, which is a multiple of 4.
It could be: 4*7 = 28
The unit digits are 2/4/6/8/0
You can tell if the number ends in either 5 or 0
It is: 4*12 = 48
If last two digits of a number are divisible by 4 then number is a multiple of 4 for a number with more than 21 digit
There is no such number. Since 4 more than that number would be a higher multiple. And 4 more than THAT number would be a higher multiple still. And so on.
There is no number that is "divisible by 4" and "not divisible by 4" at the same time - a number cannot be both a multiple of 4 and not a multiple of 4.
Oh, dude, like, totally! So, to check if a number is a multiple of 4, you just need to see if it's divisible by 4 without any remainder. And guess what? 58 is not divisible by 4 because if you divide 58 by 4, you get 14 with a remainder of 2. So, in short, 58 is not a multiple of 4.
8 is a multiple and is not a perfect square.
There is no greatest multiple of any number: whatever multiple of 4 you say is the greatest I can always add 4 and get an even greater multiple.