The GCF is x.
Notice that we can factor out 2x from both terms on the LH side: ... 4x2+6x=0. The greatest common factor of 4 and 6 is 2 . The greatest common factor of x2 and x ...
There is no greatest common multiple. Ever! If x were the greatest common multiple, then what about 2x? Since x is a multiple of 16 and 24 then so also is 2x, so that 2x is a COMMON multiple. And it would certainly be greater that x. So 2x is a common multiple that is greater than the greatest common multiple. What?!
First, pull out a GCF, or a greatest common factor, x, and continue from there. So it'll be x(x^3-3x+2). Then it would be x(x^2-2)(x-1) and there you have it.
There can be no greatest common denominator. Suppose x is the greatest common denominator. That requires that 39 divides x, 26 divides x and x is the greatest such number. But 39 will divide 2x and 26 will divide 2x and 2x is greater than x. So x could not have been a GCD.
* First find the greatest common factor. * In this case it is 2. * Now divide out 2 from each term * Your final answer should be: * 2(x-6)
The GCF of anything compared to itself is itself.
hcf(6x², 8x) = 2x 6x² = 2 × 3 × x² 8x = 2³ × x → hcf = 2 × x = 2x
Notice that we can factor out 2x from both terms on the LH side: ... 4x2+6x=0. The greatest common factor of 4 and 6 is 2 . The greatest common factor of x2 and x ...
The gcf is ' 1 ', no matter what whole number 'x' is.
There can be no greatest common denominator. For supose x is the greatest common denominator. ie 24 divides x and 36 divides x. Then 2x is a common denominator and 2x > x so 2x is a greater common denominator than the greatest common denominator. That contradiction implies that there is no greatest common denominator.
The GCF for the numerical part is 2 . The factors for x2 are xâ‹…x x â‹… x . The factor for x1 is x itself
There is no greatest common multiple. Ever! If x were the greatest common multiple, then what about 2x? Since x is a multiple of 16 and 24 then so also is 2x, so that 2x is a COMMON multiple. And it would certainly be greater that x. So 2x is a common multiple that is greater than the greatest common multiple. What?!
There is NO greatest common multiple. Suppose x is the greatest common multiple. Then, it is easy to show that 2x will be a common multiple and 2x > x so x cannot be the greatest.
Factor means you take what the two terms have alike, like 2x and 4x have 2x in common or 3x and 2x have x in common.
First, pull out a GCF, or a greatest common factor, x, and continue from there. So it'll be x(x^3-3x+2). Then it would be x(x^2-2)(x-1) and there you have it.
There can be no greatest common denominator. Suppose x is the greatest common denominator. That requires that 39 divides x, 26 divides x and x is the greatest such number. But 39 will divide 2x and 26 will divide 2x and 2x is greater than x. So x could not have been a GCD.
The greatest common factor of 22 and 66 can be done in a split second. I am assuming the person who asked this question knew that 2 x 3 = 6. Multiplication works in your favor. When doing 22 x 3, You do 2x 3, and then 2x 3 again, thus getting 66. The answer is therefore 22.