BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Is -5 prime , Is (6)^1/2 Even ?

Expert replies
Source: — Problem Solving |

by Rahul@gurome » Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:50 pm
-5 is not a prime as prime numbers are integers greater than 1.

Even numbers always end with a digit 0, 2, 4, 6, 8. And 6^(1/2) is a decimal so it is not an even number.
Rahul Lakhani
Quant Expert
Gurome, Inc.
https://www.GuroMe.com
On MBA sabbatical (at ISB) for 2011-12 - will stay active as time permits
1-800-566-4043 (USA)
+91-99201 32411 (India)
Join the discussion

by neerajbansal » Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:32 pm
thanks for your answer..
Join the discussion

by barcebal » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:29 pm
Another way that I look at prime numbers...

Prime number is a number where only has the number 1 and itself as its factors.

Therefore -5 has factors of -1 and 5, and if you want to include it, 1.

This means that -5 has one factor two many to be prime.
Join the discussion

by ScottD » Tue Jul 13, 2010 6:41 am
Factors of -5 could be 1 and -5, which would satisfy the rule of 'factors of 1 and itself'

Is there something I'm forgetting?
Join the discussion

by barcebal » Tue Jul 13, 2010 7:00 am
"Factors of -5 could be 1 and -5, which would satisfy the rule of 'factors of 1 and itself'

Is there something I'm forgetting?"
That's like saying factors of 20 could be 20 and 1 so 20 is prime.

Just remember that negative numbers can never be prime because the true definition of prime isn't a number with "factors of 1 and itself," but instead a number with "two distinct natural number divisors". A natural number is 1,2,3,4,5..... 0 and neg integers are not natural numbers.

So with -5 what are two unique positive integers other than 0 that can multiply and create -5? You can't do it with just two. The only way is 5*1*-1, which does not satisfy the rule of (1) only two factors and (2) the only two factors of the number must be natural.

This is why 1 is NOT prime. What two UNIQUE natural numbers can you multiply together and get 1? Well you might say 1*1, but they are not unique, they are the same number, so 1 is not prime.

My illustration in the previous post may not be sufficient. But hopefully this clarifies with a bit more definitional jargon.
Join the discussion

by neerajbansal » Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:15 am
barcebal --> That's a wonderful explanation...
Join the discussion