no. in order for a number to be divisible by 3 its numbers have to have a sum of a number divisible by 3.
EX. (302) 3+0+2 = 5. 5 is not divisible by 3.
Therefore 302 is not divisible by 3.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
No 300 / 3 = 100 303 / 3 = 101 as whole numbers 302 / 3 = 100.66666 so answer is yes, but not a whole number answer
Find a calculator or use your brain! And without a decimal, no.
It is divisible by 3, for example.It is divisible by 3, for example.It is divisible by 3, for example.It is divisible by 3, for example.
A number is divisible by 3 if the sum of its digits is divisible by 3.
1x6,743 not divisible by 2 no its not divisible by 3????
No. 302 is divisible by 1, 2, 151, 302.
No 300 / 3 = 100 303 / 3 = 101 as whole numbers 302 / 3 = 100.66666 so answer is yes, but not a whole number answer
No, it is divisible by 3.No, it is divisible by 3.No, it is divisible by 3.No, it is divisible by 3.
Find a calculator or use your brain! And without a decimal, no.
It is divisible by 3, for example.It is divisible by 3, for example.It is divisible by 3, for example.It is divisible by 3, for example.
3 is not divisible by 72. 72 is divisible by 3.
A number is divisible by 3 if the sum of its digits is divisible by 3.
If x is an integer divisible by 3, is x squared divisible by 3?
3 is not divisible by 126. 126 is divisible by 3.
If you mean: 302.3 then it is 302 and 3/10
1x6,743 not divisible by 2 no its not divisible by 3????