3, yes.
All the rest, no.
There are an infinite series of numbers that are divisible by 228. Two of them are 456 and 684.On the other hand, if the questioner had meant "what is 228 divisible by?", then the answer is 2, 3, and 19, of which 2 applies twice.1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 19, 38, 57, 76, 114, 228
No.
No since only numbers in which its sum can be divisible by 3 is divisible by 3. 2 + 4 + 4 is 10, and 10 is not divisible by 3.
1, 2, 7, 3 and 6 are not divisible by 4 and/or 9. 12736 is divisible by 4 but not by 9.
Yes. If a number is evenly divisible by both 3 and 4, it will also be divisible by 6.This is because the prime factor of 3 is [3] -- in other words, 3 is a prime number -- and the prime factors of 4 are [2, 2].Thus, any number that is divisible by 3 and 4 will have as part of its prime factors the set [2, 2, 3]. (The smallest such number is 12, which is 2 x 2 x 3.) Since the prime factors of 6 are [2, 3] -- and [2, 3] is a subset of [2, 2, 3] -- then any such number must also be divisible by 6.Another way to look at it is to note that all numbers which are divisible by both 3 and 4 are also divisible by 12 (which is 3 x 4). Since 12 is divisible by 6, then all multiples of 12 will also be divisible by 6.
There are an infinite series of numbers that are divisible by 228. Two of them are 456 and 684.On the other hand, if the questioner had meant "what is 228 divisible by?", then the answer is 2, 3, and 19, of which 2 applies twice.1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 19, 38, 57, 76, 114, 228
are 2 and 8 divisible by 4
57 is the only one evenly divisible by 19 (or 3) ...and the other three are prime numbers
No.
3 is divisible by neither 2 nor 4. 3 divided by 2 is 11/2 = 1.5 3 divided by 4 is 3/4 = 0.75
57 is divisible by 3 so it is composite. A prime number has only 2 factors which are 1 and itself. Composite numbers are everything else except 1, 2, and 0. 1, 2, and 0 have a different name.
684 is divisible by any real number, but I assume you mean whole number denominators, which would be 2, 4, 6, 12, 18, 38, 57, 114, 171, 342
No, 228 is divisible by 4.
No since only numbers in which its sum can be divisible by 3 is divisible by 3. 2 + 4 + 4 is 10, and 10 is not divisible by 3.
1, 2, 7, 3 and 6 are not divisible by 4 and/or 9. 12736 is divisible by 4 but not by 9.
650130 is not divisible by 4, but it is divisible by 2, 3, 5, 6, and 10
not divisible by 9.but it is divisible by 4.