There is no smallest number since if any number is divisible by 8, then 8 less than that number is also divisible by 8 - and that argument continues all the way to minus infinity!The smallest positive number divisible by 8 is 8, itself.
That would be the same as the smallest four-digit even number: 1,000, which also happens to be the smallest four-digit whole number.
The longest number that would also be the smallest would be the highest number counted to just made into its negative form.
No.First off, 120 is not divisible by 9. (The sum of the digits of 120 is "3"; a number is divisible by nine if and only if the sum of its digits is divisible by nine.) For that matter, it's not divisible by 36 either; since 36 is itself divisible by 9, any number which is not divisible by 9 cannot be divisible by 36.The smallest number that's divisible by 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 36 is "36" (it's also divisible by 4, which you left out).
7 itself. Actually, 0 is also divisible by 7, as are negative multiples of 7, so it really depends what set of numbers you consider. If you include negative numbers, there is no "smallest multiple".
There is no smallest number since if any number is divisible by 8, then 8 less than that number is also divisible by 8 - and that argument continues all the way to minus infinity!The smallest positive number divisible by 8 is 8, itself.
1000 is the smallest 4 digit number but of the two factors, it is only divisible by 2. As 999 is obviously divisible by 3 then 999 + 3 = 1002 is also divisible by 3 and, as an even number, is also divisible by 2. The answer is 1002
That would be the same as the smallest four-digit even number: 1,000, which also happens to be the smallest four-digit whole number.
The least common multiple is the smallest number into whichyou can fit all of those numbers. This means that it will be divisible by 5, 6, and 8. It also has to be as small as possible. 120 is the smallest number that is divisible by all three of those.
16
The longest number that would also be the smallest would be the highest number counted to just made into its negative form.
No.First off, 120 is not divisible by 9. (The sum of the digits of 120 is "3"; a number is divisible by nine if and only if the sum of its digits is divisible by nine.) For that matter, it's not divisible by 36 either; since 36 is itself divisible by 9, any number which is not divisible by 9 cannot be divisible by 36.The smallest number that's divisible by 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 36 is "36" (it's also divisible by 4, which you left out).
To be divisible by 15, it must also be divisible by 3 and by 5. To be divisible by 3, the sum of the digits must be divisible by 3; to be divisible by 5, the number must end with a zero or a five. Considering all these criteria, I guess that number would be 1110.
7 itself. Actually, 0 is also divisible by 7, as are negative multiples of 7, so it really depends what set of numbers you consider. If you include negative numbers, there is no "smallest multiple".
I BELIEVE IT IS 156 THE SMALLEST NUMBER 4 AND 6 GO INTO IS 12 12 X 13 = 156
Yes, any number that is divisible by 4 is also divisible by 2.
factors