Well, isn't that just a happy little math problem we have here! To factor 2x-12, we can first look for the greatest common factor, which in this case is 2. So we can factor out the 2 to get 2(x - 6). And there you have it, a beautifully factored expression ready to bring joy to your mathematical world.
Notice that we can factor out 2x from both terms on the LH side: ... 4x2+6x=0. The greatest common factor of 4 and 6 is 2 . The greatest common factor of x2 and x ...
There is no greatest common multiple. Ever! If x were the greatest common multiple, then what about 2x? Since x is a multiple of 16 and 24 then so also is 2x, so that 2x is a COMMON multiple. And it would certainly be greater that x. So 2x is a common multiple that is greater than the greatest common multiple. What?!
First, pull out a GCF, or a greatest common factor, x, and continue from there. So it'll be x(x^3-3x+2). Then it would be x(x^2-2)(x-1) and there you have it.
There can be no greatest common denominator. Suppose x is the greatest common denominator. That requires that 39 divides x, 26 divides x and x is the greatest such number. But 39 will divide 2x and 26 will divide 2x and 2x is greater than x. So x could not have been a GCD.
The GCF of anything compared to itself is itself.
hcf(6x², 8x) = 2x 6x² = 2 × 3 × x² 8x = 2³ × x → hcf = 2 × x = 2x
Notice that we can factor out 2x from both terms on the LH side: ... 4x2+6x=0. The greatest common factor of 4 and 6 is 2 . The greatest common factor of x2 and x ...
Well, isn't that just a happy little math problem we have here! To factor 2x-12, we can first look for the greatest common factor, which in this case is 2. So we can factor out the 2 to get 2(x - 6). And there you have it, a beautifully factored expression ready to bring joy to your mathematical world.
The gcf is ' 1 ', no matter what whole number 'x' is.
There can be no greatest common denominator. For supose x is the greatest common denominator. ie 24 divides x and 36 divides x. Then 2x is a common denominator and 2x > x so 2x is a greater common denominator than the greatest common denominator. That contradiction implies that there is no greatest common denominator.
The GCF for the numerical part is 2 . The factors for x2 are xâ‹…x x â‹… x . The factor for x1 is x itself
There is no greatest common multiple. Ever! If x were the greatest common multiple, then what about 2x? Since x is a multiple of 16 and 24 then so also is 2x, so that 2x is a COMMON multiple. And it would certainly be greater that x. So 2x is a common multiple that is greater than the greatest common multiple. What?!
Factor means you take what the two terms have alike, like 2x and 4x have 2x in common or 3x and 2x have x in common.
First, pull out a GCF, or a greatest common factor, x, and continue from there. So it'll be x(x^3-3x+2). Then it would be x(x^2-2)(x-1) and there you have it.
There can be no greatest common denominator. Suppose x is the greatest common denominator. That requires that 39 divides x, 26 divides x and x is the greatest such number. But 39 will divide 2x and 26 will divide 2x and 2x is greater than x. So x could not have been a GCD.
The greatest common factor of 22 and 66 can be done in a split second. I am assuming the person who asked this question knew that 2 x 3 = 6. Multiplication works in your favor. When doing 22 x 3, You do 2x 3, and then 2x 3 again, thus getting 66. The answer is therefore 22.