No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.
977 is a prime. So the only factorisation is the trivial one: 1*977
no.. for example 6,12,18 are divisible by 2..but not divisible by 8.
416 is divisible by 2 but is not divisible by 3.
402 is divisible by 2.402 is divisible by 2.402 is divisible by 2.402 is divisible by 2.
Yes - 1954/2 = 977
1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 18, 24, 27, 36, 54, 72, 108, 216, 977, 1954, 2931, 3908, 5862, 7816, 8793, 11724, 17586, 23448, 26379, 35172, 52758, 70344, 105516, 211032
Yes, it is. 891 divided by 3 is 297. 297 is a whole number, so 891 can be said to be divisible by three.
1 and 977
No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.No, both are divisible by 2.
9 is 0.9212% of 977 because 9/977 is 0.009212.
351 is not divisible by 2. 2 is not divisible by 351.
2 is not divisible by 19008. 19008 is divisible by 2.
2 is not divisible by 972. 972 is divisible by 2.
2 is not divisible by 870. 870 is divisible by 2.
Of course not ! The answer is right within your question: 2 is divisible by 2 but 2 is not divisible by ... (can you dig it ?)
977 is a prime. So the only factorisation is the trivial one: 1*977