Duplicate Question
The question on this page has been marked as a duplicate question.
Original Question
Rewrite the expression as a product of identical factors to find the product for 100 3/2 . Submit your answer in simplified for...Asked by nuh uhhh
Rewrite the expression as a product of identical factors to find the product for 10032
. Submit your answer in simplified form.
(1 point)
. Submit your answer in simplified form.
(1 point)
Answers
There are no human answers yet.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
To rewrite the expression for 10032 as a product of identical factors, we need to factor it completely.
First, let's find the prime factorization of 10032.
1. Start by dividing by 2 (the smallest prime):
- \(10032 \div 2 = 5016\)
- \(5016 \div 2 = 2508\)
- \(2508 \div 2 = 1254\)
- \(1254 \div 2 = 627\)
2. Now, 627 is not divisible by 2, so we try the next prime number, which is 3:
- \(627 \div 3 = 209\)
3. Next, test 209 for divisibility by the next primes. It is not divisible by 3, 5, or 7, but:
- \(209 = 11 \times 19\) (since 11 and 19 are both primes)
Putting it all together:
- The prime factorization of 10032 is:
\[
10032 = 2^4 \times 3^1 \times 11^1 \times 19^1
\]
To express 10032 as a product of identical factors (if possible), we note that 2 is the only prime factor with a power that is greater than 1. Since \(2\) occurs \(4\) times in the factorization, we can also include the product of the other factors.
However, we can express 10032 as a product:
\[
10032 = (2^2 \times 3 \times 11 \times 19) \times (2^2) = 84 \times 2^4
\]
Thus, breaking this down into the largest identical product is limited, as identical repetitions need the factors to be the same. The best we can say for factorization into identical factors:
\[
10032 = 2^4 \cdot (3 \cdot 11 \cdot 19)
\]
In this case, the necessary product of two identical factors that equals \(10032\) doesn’t easily exist, but we transitively see that \(2^4\) = 16 and \(84\) can be kept in focus.
The final answer in simplified factored form would be:
\[
10032 = 2^4 \times 3 \times 11 \times 19 = 84 \times 16
\]
Thus, in request for a product of identical factors, it most aligns with the usable lower systematic calculations, given that \(10032\) does not reduce more identically into mere repetitions.
If you're looking for \(10032\) as a product:
\[
\text{Product: } 10032
\]
This reduces to an expression ideally as noted: \( \text{10032 = } (2^2 \cdot 84) = 10032; 4 \text{ is the maximum repetition here, effectively.} \)
(A caveat of the factor product lanes derived.)
First, let's find the prime factorization of 10032.
1. Start by dividing by 2 (the smallest prime):
- \(10032 \div 2 = 5016\)
- \(5016 \div 2 = 2508\)
- \(2508 \div 2 = 1254\)
- \(1254 \div 2 = 627\)
2. Now, 627 is not divisible by 2, so we try the next prime number, which is 3:
- \(627 \div 3 = 209\)
3. Next, test 209 for divisibility by the next primes. It is not divisible by 3, 5, or 7, but:
- \(209 = 11 \times 19\) (since 11 and 19 are both primes)
Putting it all together:
- The prime factorization of 10032 is:
\[
10032 = 2^4 \times 3^1 \times 11^1 \times 19^1
\]
To express 10032 as a product of identical factors (if possible), we note that 2 is the only prime factor with a power that is greater than 1. Since \(2\) occurs \(4\) times in the factorization, we can also include the product of the other factors.
However, we can express 10032 as a product:
\[
10032 = (2^2 \times 3 \times 11 \times 19) \times (2^2) = 84 \times 2^4
\]
Thus, breaking this down into the largest identical product is limited, as identical repetitions need the factors to be the same. The best we can say for factorization into identical factors:
\[
10032 = 2^4 \cdot (3 \cdot 11 \cdot 19)
\]
In this case, the necessary product of two identical factors that equals \(10032\) doesn’t easily exist, but we transitively see that \(2^4\) = 16 and \(84\) can be kept in focus.
The final answer in simplified factored form would be:
\[
10032 = 2^4 \times 3 \times 11 \times 19 = 84 \times 16
\]
Thus, in request for a product of identical factors, it most aligns with the usable lower systematic calculations, given that \(10032\) does not reduce more identically into mere repetitions.
If you're looking for \(10032\) as a product:
\[
\text{Product: } 10032
\]
This reduces to an expression ideally as noted: \( \text{10032 = } (2^2 \cdot 84) = 10032; 4 \text{ is the maximum repetition here, effectively.} \)
(A caveat of the factor product lanes derived.)
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.