Yes, 96 and 105 are relatively prime because they have no prime factors in common.
The prime factors of 105 can only be prime numbers less than the square root of 105. The greatest prime less than the square root of 105 is 7, so the only numbers that need to be considered as possible prime factors of 105 are 2, 3, 5, and 7. 2 cannot be one of its prime factors because 105 is an odd number. Divide 105 by the next larger possible prime, 3, and the quotient is 35, proving that 3 is a prime factor of 105. 35 cannot be divided by 3, but 5 goes into 35 leaving a quotient of 7. The prime factorization of 105 is 3 x 5 x 7.
No, 65 and 70 are not relatively prime. Relatively prime numbers only have the number 1 as a common factor. 65 and 70 also have 5 as a common factor, so they are not relatively prime.
They are respectively:-2*5 = 105*7 = 452*7 = 14
No, 42 and 68 are not relatively prime. They have more than the number 1 as a common factor.
No, they are not relatively prime.
No. To be relatively prime, numbers have to have a GCF of 1. Numbers ending in 5 are divisible by 5.
No, they are not relatively prime.
Yes, 35 and 54 are relatively prime.
No, they are not relatively prime.
no
No.
10 and 35 are not relatively prime because they share the prime factor 5.
It can be. 34 is relatively prime to 35. 34 is not relatively prime to 40.
25 is relatively prime with 36. 25 is not relatively prime with 35.
Yes, 96 and 105 are relatively prime because they have no prime factors in common.
No.