# data[].attributes.headline
The answer will always be one. So you wouldn't get any other number only 1.

# data[].attributes.subject
The answer will always be one. So you wouldn't get any other number only 1.

# data[].attributes.body
It will always be one.

# data[].attributes.body
it will always be one

# data[].attributes.body
LCF is pointless beacuse it will always be one.

# data[].attributes.headline
There isnt a LCF becaue the answer would always be one

# data[].attributes.subject
There isnt a LCF becaue the answer would always be one

# data[].attributes.headline
it won't work because you will keep getting one no matter what        aliya g

# data[].attributes.subject
it won't work because you will keep getting one no matter what        aliya g

# data[].attributes.body
There isn't LCF because the answer will always be one.

# data[].attributes.headline
(Mason Red) LCF is not a thing because it will always be one 

# data[].attributes.subject
(Mason Red) LCF is not a thing because it will always be one 

# data[].attributes.body
I think LCF is not a thing because you will always be 1 no matter what.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no such thing as LCF because the answer would always be one.

# data[].attributes.body
No, if there was one the same number would just repeat which is 1, because that is the lowest number the factor can get to.

# data[].attributes.body
no, your answer will always be the same.

# data[].attributes.body
N

# data[].attributes.body
No, your answer will always be the same.

# data[].attributes.body
No, because your answer will always be the same.

# data[].attributes.headline
𝕀𝕤 𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣𝕖 𝕒 𝕃𝕖𝕒𝕤𝕥 ℂ𝕠𝕞𝕞𝕠𝕟 𝔽𝕒𝕔𝕥𝕠𝕣?

# data[].attributes.subject
𝕀𝕤 𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣𝕖 𝕒 𝕃𝕖𝕒𝕤𝕥 ℂ𝕠𝕞𝕞𝕠𝕟 𝔽𝕒𝕔𝕥𝕠𝕣?

# data[].attributes.body
Technically, yes there is, but it is always 1. It's like multiplying by 0, your answer is always the same.

P.S. don't copy my title.

# data[].attributes.body
it is not their because no matter what the lowest it can be is 1

# data[].attributes.headline
It is not their because no matter what the lowest common factor would be 1

# data[].attributes.subject
It is not their because no matter what the lowest common factor would be 1

# data[].attributes.body
because it will always be the same number 1.

# data[].attributes.headline
It is always gonna be one because there is nothing 

# data[].attributes.subject
It is always gonna be one because there is nothing 

# data[].attributes.body
There is a 1 even if you do 2 times 1 it is still 1

# data[].attributes.body
There is always a 1 what ever you do.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no LCF, only because it will always be 1.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no such thing as LCF. It is always going to be 1.

# data[].attributes.body
there is no such thing as a lowest common factor because the answer will always be 1

# data[].attributes.body
There is no such as LCF because the answer is always 1.

# data[].attributes.body
you  don't need it because its too easy and its always gonna be 1 so , its just unnecessary

# data[].attributes.body
There is no such thing as a LCF because you don't need to know the lowest common factor.

# data[].attributes.body
Well because 1 decicied
[insert joke here] . one will always be the lowest.

# data[].attributes.body
there is no such thing because it will always be one and you don't need to know the LCF

# data[].attributes.body
there is no such thing as the lowest common factor because 1 will always be the lowest so there is no point in having an L.C.F

# data[].attributes.headline
There is no lowest common factor because... 

# data[].attributes.subject
There is no lowest common factor because... 

# data[].attributes.body
The 1 will always appear to be the lowest common factor because it can multiply with any number, so that means it will always be factor of no matter what. 1 is the lowest number, so no other number will be  the lowest common factor because 1 is always going be there and is the lowest number.

-Matt

# data[].attributes.headline
Why is there no common multiple? -Jarod 

# data[].attributes.subject
Why is there no common multiple? -Jarod 

# data[].attributes.body
I think that LCF is not a thing because no matter the problem and numbers it will always be 1.

# data[].attributes.body
it is not that it is least common

# data[].attributes.body
There is no least common multiple because it will always be 1 and its to easy.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why is there no common multiple? -Holden

# data[].attributes.subject
Why is there no common multiple? -Holden

# data[].attributes.body
I think there is no least common multiple because it will always be one.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that there is no such thing as a LCF because they just wanted it to be different from GCF. Also, they might have thought it would be too easy.


more_vert
Its Easy!
Its Easy!
i like it because its fast and easy, all you have to do is find a number that can be multiplied into both of the numbers, then find how much you have to multiply to get your numbers, and once you reach a number that can't be multiplied, add all the numbers that can be multiplied into both numbers, and WALLA, you have your answer
well i think because factors are few there is not a lot of room to work with. so they maybe thought it was to easy.
well i think because factors are few there is not a lot of room to work with. so they maybe thought it was to easy.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no such thing as an LCF because there are multiple LCFs

# data[].attributes.body
I think that there is no such thing as a LCF because they just wanted it to be different from GCF. Also, they might have thought it would be too easy.

# data[].attributes.body
i like it because its fast and easy, all you have to do is find a number that can be multiplied into both of the numbers, then find how much you have to multiply to get your numbers, and once you reach a number that can't be multiplied, add all the numbers that can be multiplied into both numbers, and WALLA, you have your answer

# data[].attributes.headline
well i think because factors are few there is not a lot of room to work with. so they maybe thought it was to easy.

# data[].attributes.subject
well i think because factors are few there is not a lot of room to work with. so they maybe thought it was to easy.