Q: Is 57 and 96 relatively prime?

Write your answer...

Submit

Still have questions?

Continue Learning about Math & Arithmetic

No.

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.

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.

No, they are not relatively prime.

It can be. 26 is relatively prime to 27. 26 is not relatively prime to 34.

Related questions

No, they are not relatively prime.

No.

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

Yes.

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.

57 + 96 = 153

0.5938

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.

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.

No, they are not relatively prime.

It can be. 34 is relatively prime to 35. 34 is not relatively prime to 40.

25 is relatively prime with 36. 25 is not relatively prime with 35.