thanksIt is. I hope you understand why and not just making a lucky guess.
thanksIt is. I hope you understand why and not just making a lucky guess.
hey sorry for getting this active again but i did this problem again today and i have a questionIt is. I hope you understand why and not just making a lucky guess.
One is not a prime number. You should know that.hey sorry for getting this active again but i did this problem again today and i have a question
i found 5 prime divisors 2, 3, 5, 167, 401
2^n = 2^5 = 32 - this is the answer
however
what about 1? shouldn't we include it in prime divisors?
There are reasons not to count 1 as a divisor. With prime numbers there is a unique representation for each natural number m=p1k1p2k2...pnkn, e.g. 75=52⋅31. But with 1 any power, including 0, can be included. I.e., the representation is no longer unique.hey sorry for getting this active again but i did this problem again today and i have a question
i found 5 prime divisors 2, 3, 5, 167, 401
2^n = 2^5 = 32 - this is the answer
however
what about 1? shouldn't we include it in prime divisors?
Suppose that the number n has the prime factorization:hey sorry for getting this active again but i did this problem again today and i have a question
i found 5 prime divisors 2, 3, 5, 167, 401
2^n = 2^5 = 32 - this is the answer
however
what about 1? shouldn't we include it in prime divisors?