English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

HW help plz... :]

2007-11-14 11:20:52 · 11 answers · asked by Lucy 1 in Science & Mathematics Mathematics

11 answers

No

3117 / 3 = 1039

2007-11-14 11:28:39 · answer #1 · answered by pyz01 7 · 0 0

To say a thing like that is to confirm that the distinction between odd and even is more of a language concept than a numerical concept. You could also say that it is significant that among all the even numbers, 2 is the only prime one, compared with quite a lot of primes among the odd numbers. The real anomaly with 2 as a prime is because it is so small. For all other primes P, the number 1 behaves in a certain way relative to it, and the number P-1 behaves in a certain other way. When P is 2, the numbers 1 and P-1 are identical.

2016-05-23 04:47:52 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

No, it divides exactly by 3 to give 1039.

1039 is a prime number, but you can only show that by dividing by each of 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, and 31 in turn, and checking that none of the divisions are exact.

2007-11-15 04:08:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No -- it is divisible by three.

Here is a fun fact for you. If you take the digits of a number & add them all together then if the sum od the digits is three, the number is divisible by three also. This also works with nine.

2007-11-14 11:30:16 · answer #4 · answered by Ranto 7 · 2 0

prime number - a number only divisible by 2 factors, 1 and itself
ex. 29 - its only divsibile by 1 and 29
composite number - a number divisible by more than 2 factors
ex. 10 - divisible by 1,2,5 and 10
now that you no wat it is, see if you can divide 3,117 by anything. if its divisible by only 2 numbers (1 and itself) its PRIME
if its divisible by more than 2 numbers its COMPOSITE
hope this helps!

2007-11-14 12:15:28 · answer #5 · answered by soccerchick xx3 3 · 0 1

3 is a prime number
171 is not prime because it is divisible by 3

2007-11-14 11:37:08 · answer #6 · answered by se 1 · 0 1

no, start dividing by small prime numbers and you should quickly find some factors.

2007-11-14 11:25:24 · answer #7 · answered by Paladin 7 · 0 1

And the same question shows up again

2016-08-15 01:09:43 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

nope.

2007-11-14 11:25:18 · answer #9 · answered by Kira Hinata 1 · 0 1

Nope, it is not.

2007-11-14 11:26:55 · answer #10 · answered by Gladius B 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers