answersLogoWhite

0

No, they are not relatively prime.

User Avatar

Wiki User

9y ago

What else can I help you with?

Related Questions

Are 57 and 96 relatively prime?

Two numbers are relatively prime if their greatest common divisor (GCD) is 1. The GCD of 57 and 96 is 3, as both numbers share the factor 3 (57 = 3 × 19 and 96 = 3 × 32). Therefore, 57 and 96 are not relatively prime.


Are 96 and 105 relatively prime numbers?

No, they are not relatively prime.


Are 72 and 96 relatively prime?

No.


Is 96 and 105 relative prime?

Yes, 96 and 105 are relatively prime because they have no prime factors in common.


Are 37 and 96 relatively prime?

Yes.


Is 108 and 57 relatively prime?

No, 108 and 57 are not relatively prime because they share a common factor. Both numbers can be divided by 3, which means their greatest common divisor (GCD) is greater than 1. Therefore, they are not relatively prime.


Are 57 and 111 prime?

No. Both 57 and 111 are composite numbers. Factors of 57 are 1, 3, 19 and 57. Factors of 111 are 1, 3, 37 and 111. They share two factors 1 and 3, so they are not relatively prime either.


What is 57 plus 96?

57 + 96 = 153


What is 57 divided by 96?

0.5938


What is the largest prime number 57?

No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.No, there is no largest prime number. Also 57 is not a prime.


What you 57 over 100 in simplest form?

57 an 100 are relatively co-prime, i.e. they share no factors other than 1 between them, so 57 over 100 is already in simplest form.


Are 27 and 117 relatively prime?

No, they are not relatively prime.