All composite numbers can be expressed as unique products of prime numbers. This is accomplished by dividing the original number and its factors by prime numbers until all the factors are prime. A factor tree can help you visualize this.
Example: 210
210 Divide by two.
105,2 Divide by three.
35,3,2 Divide by five.
7,5,3,2 Stop. All the factors are prime.
2 x 3 x 5 x 7 = 210
That's the prime factorization of 210.
No, 3x5x4 is not a prime factorization of 60. A prime factorization of 60 would consist of only prime numbers. The prime factorization of 60 is 2x2x3x5.
5 and 2 are prime numbers, and thus can't be factorized any further. So the prime factorization of 5 would be 5, and the prime factorization of 2 would be 2. :)
The prime factorization for 53 is: 1 x 53 .Exponents would only get in the way.
When all the factors are prime numbers, that's a prime factorization.
Prime factorization!
No, 3x5x4 is not a prime factorization of 60. A prime factorization of 60 would consist of only prime numbers. The prime factorization of 60 is 2x2x3x5.
the prime factorization would be 3*7*7
57977 is a prime number, so the prime factorization of it would be just "57977".
No, 2x2x5 is not a prime factorization because 2 is not a prime factor. A prime factorization is a representation of a number as a product of prime numbers. In this case, the prime factorization of 2x2x5 would be 2x2x5 or 2^2x5.
5 and 2 are prime numbers, and thus can't be factorized any further. So the prime factorization of 5 would be 5, and the prime factorization of 2 would be 2. :)
0.4286
It would be 2X2X3X7X7X13
29 is a prime number
19 is prime so the prime factorization would simply be 19.
The prime factorization of 1750 is 2 x 5 x 5 x 5 x 7. To be common, it would need to be compared to another prime factorization.
The prime factorization for 53 is: 1 x 53 .Exponents would only get in the way.
No - since 9 is not a prime number, it would be reduced even further. The prime factorization in question would be equal to 2 x 32 x 11 = 198.