The prime factors of 4 are 2 and 2. The prime factors of 9 are 3 and 3. They do not have any prime factors in common, so they are relatively prime.
27 is not a prime number and i dont know about 117 but i dont think its a composite # * * * * * The person who gave the above answer has no understanding of "relative primes". Or primes, for that matter. Neither 8 nor 9 is a prime BUT 8 and 9 are relatively prime (or co-prime) because they have no factor in common. That is what relatively prime means. 117 is not a prime, even if the previous answerer thinks otherwise. 27 and 117 are not relatively prime because both are divisible by 3.
No, because 1 is not their only common factor. The number 3 is also a common factor.
It can be. 21 is relatively prime with 32.
No, 100 and 202 are not relatively prime. Relatively prime numbers only have the number 1 as a common factor. The number 1 is a common factor for them, but the number 2 is another common factor that they have, so they are not relatively prime.
Yes, e.g. 3 and 5 are relatively prime, 27 (33) and 25 (52) are relatively prime...
No, they are not relatively prime.
No, they are not relatively prime.
Yes, e.g. 3 and 5 are relatively prime, 27 (33) and 25 (52) are relatively prime...
Yes, they are relatively prime.
Yes, they are relatively prime.
yes
52
Yes, they are relatively prime.
319=(11)(29) 450=2(32) (52 ) So they have no common factors and are relatively prime.
No, 57 and 96 are not relatively prime because they share a common factor of 3.
no three is not a Prime number