It would be a smaller number, but without knowing what fraction it is raised to, you can't tell how much smaller.
No they do not, take a big prime number and compare it to a smaller composite number. The number 6833 as only two factors (divisors), namely 1 and itself. But the number 68 which is much smaller has more factors or divisors. 68 has 2 and 4 and 17 and 1 and itself which is already more divisors than 6833.
Ten times smaller.
The numerator is "much smaller" than the denominator. "Much smaller" is subjective, but then so is "close to" in the question.
A 100 is ten times smaller than a 1000
SO pretty much, you would fit the smaller number into the bigger number, and turn the extras into a negitave (ex. 6-8=(-2)
It would be a smaller number, but without knowing what fraction it is raised to, you can't tell how much smaller.
I suspect the answer you are looking for is an outlier.
The litre would be a much smaller number.
The Namib is the smallest major desert in Africa. However, there are a number of much smaller deserts in a number of African countries.
Nitrogen has the smallest atomic number among nitrogen, chromium, and radon. Nitrogen has an atomic number of 7, chromium has an atomic number of 24, and radon has an atomic number of 86.
No much smaller actually.
Much, MUCH smaller than the smallest star.
Much smaller
Antarctica is much, much smaller than Africa.
American Wire Guage. The smaller the number the larger the wire. As in an AWG 14/2 wire is much smaller than an AWG 10/2 wire.
Much smaller.