60 is neither a square number nor a prime number.
No but it can be a square number because 1*1 = 1
An oxymoron. Prime numbers can't be square. Square numbers can't be prime. You can square a prime number: 3 x 3 - 32 = 9
A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.
a prime square
No square number can be a prime number and conversely.
113 is prime, not square.
210 is neither a prime number or a square number.
60 is neither a square number nor a prime number.
No but it can be a square number because 1*1 = 1
An oxymoron. Prime numbers can't be square. Square numbers can't be prime. You can square a prime number: 3 x 3 - 32 = 9
A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.A square number, by definition, cannot be a prime so the answer is there are no such numbers.
a prime square
1 is not considered a prime number; 1 is a perfect square.
No, there are no prime numbers that are also square numbers. Prime numbers are only divisible by 1 and themselves, while square numbers have integer square roots. Since the square root of a prime number is not an integer, a prime number cannot be a square number.
49 is not a prime number. It is the square of the prime number 7.
No, never. It would be divisible by the prime number.