What is the GCF of 36 and 84? Find the prime factorization of 36. Find the prime factorization of 84. 84 = 2 × 2 × 3 × 7. To find the GCF, multiply all the prime factors common to both numbers: Therefore, GCF = 2 × 2 × 3. GCF = 12. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 36. 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 18, 27, and 54. Although the numbers in bold are all common factors of both 36 and 54, 18 is the greatest common factor. The second method to find the greatest common factor is to list the prime factors, then multiply the common prime factors. Greatest Common Factor and Greatest Common Divisor The TI-84 Plus CE will find the GCF/GCD of two numbers. Example 1: To find the GCF of 24 and 30, press math, arrow over to NUM, and select 9:gcd( —either by moving the cursor down to option 9 and pressing enter, or by simply pressing 9). Greatest common factor (GCF) of 36 and 47 is 1. We will now calculate the prime factors of 36 and 47, than find the greatest common factor (greatest common divisor (gcd)) of the numbers by matching the biggest common factor of 36 and 47. Example 4: Find the GCF of 24 and 36. The common factors of 24 and 36 are 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12. The greatest common factor of 24 and 36 is 12. The common factors for 20,24,40 20 , 24 , 40 are 1,2,4 1 , 2 , 4 . The GCF (HCF) of the numerical factors 1,2,4 1 , 2 , 4 is 4.
Add the fractions together to find the portion who like basketball, soccer and football.
=1/3 + 1/8 + 5/12 need a common denominator (24)
=8/24 + 3/24 + 10/24 =21/24
simplify by 3 =7/8 like basketball, football & soccer
7/8 is the total for basketball, soccer and football. If 8/8 represents the whole class, then subtract 7/8 from 8/8 to find the number who like baseball.
If there are no duplications among the six numbers, then they sit at <em>six different points</em> on the number line.
Irrational numbers are on the same number line as rational ones. The only difference is that if somebody comes along, points at one of them, and asks you to tell him its EXACT location on the line, you can answer him with digits and a fraction bar if it's a rational one, but not if it's an irrational one.
For example:
Here are some rational numbers. You can describe any of these EXACTLY with digits and/or a fraction bar:
-- 2 -- 1/2 -- (any whole number) divided by (any other whole number) (this is the definition of a rational number) -- 19 -- (any number you can write with digits) raised to (any positive whole-number power) -- 387 -- 4.0001 -- (zero or any integer) plus (zero or any repeating decimal) -- 13.14159 26535 89792 -- (any whole number) + (any decimal that ends, no matter how long it is) (this doesn't mean that a never-ending decimal isn't rational; it only means that a decimal that ends IS rational. Having an end is <em><u>enough</u></em> to guarantee that a decimal is rational, but it's not <em><u>necessary</u></em> in order for the decimal to be rational. There are a huge number of decimals that are rational but never end. Like the decimal forms of 1/3, 1/6, 1/7, 1/9, 1/11, etc.) --> the negative of anything on this list
Here are some irrational numbers. Using only digits, fraction bar, and decimal point, you can describe any of these <em><u>as close</u></em> as anybody wants to know it, but you can never write EXACTLY what it is:
-- pi -- square root of √2 -- any multiple of √2 -- any fraction of √2 -- e -- almost any logarithm
