0
What are the correct ways of calculating and expressing 1776 plus 223 entirely in Roman numerals showing detailed work?
The equivalent of 1776 and 223 converted into Roman numerals are MDCCLXXVI and CCXXIII respectively and under todays rules they officially add up to MCMXCIX which is supposed to be the equivalent of 1999.
But the ancient Romans would have probably calculated these numerals together on an abacus counting board as MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII which is the equivalent of 1999 and by placing I to both sides of these numerals systematically reduced them to IMM which is the equivalent of 2000-1 = 1999.
The real rules governing the original Roman numeral system were changed during the Middle Ages presumably to make the system more compatible friendly with the Hindu-Arabic numeral system that was gradually being introduced into Western Europe at the time.
QED by David Gambell
What else can I help you with?
What is MMCMLXXVI?
They are the modern way of expressing Roman numerals in the form of MMCMLXXVI that is the equivalent of 2976 but the ancient Romans would have used a different method of expressing the equivalent of 2976 into Roman numerals.
Did the ancient Romans use Roman numerals for calculating?
Yes, they had nothing else.
How do you write my birth date 10 21 1983 in roman numerals?
In today's terms of expressing Roman numerals: X-XXI-MCMLXXXIII
Why was the Hindu - Arabic numerals is important?
The Hindu-Arabic numeral system (the numbers that we use today:0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) replaced the Roman numeral system for calculating because it contained a 0 figure which made calculating a far lot easier than with Roman numerals.
What is the number 56435455654656 in roman numerals?
It is quite easy to convert the above Hindu-Arabic numerals into Roman numerals by means of an abacus calculating device which the Romans would use for such large numbers. Unfortunately this computer wont allow such large numbers to be converted into Roman numerals.
Name a 5 letter palindromic word made up entirely of roman numerals?
CIVIC
When was Roman Numerals changed to numbers?
Bear in mind that Roman numerals actually are numbers, they are just not the kind of numbers that we presently use, which are called Arabic numerals. Arabic numerals were first used in Europe in the year 976 AD. Roman numerals still have not entirely fallen out of use, although for most purposes we use Arabic numerals.
What are the problems with roman numerals?
There are no problems in calculating Roman numerals as one of the mightiest Empires in the ancient world found them quite easy because a zero symbol wasn't required for positional place value purposes as the positional place value of the numerals are self evident.
Where did Leonardo Fibonacci travel?
Algeria, where he learned a new knowledge from the Indian's, the knowledge was called Indian numerals and Arabic calculating methods.
What is the roman numeral of xcmviii?
That's a little tricky but I think XCMVIII is invalid. If not it would be 918. The correct writing of 918 is CMXVIIIImproved Answer:-It is: XCMVIII represents 1008-110 = 898Note that nowadays the modern way of expressing 898 as Roman numerals is DCCCXCVIII but the ancient Romans would have worked out the equivalent of 898 as DCCCLXXXXVIII on an abacus calculating device.
What did Romans use Roman Numerals for?
Romans used Roman numerals as their form of numbers. Romans needed Roman Numerals because they needed numbers to count, tell time, and do other things in life that involved numbers. Roman numerals were used because they could all be scribed using a flat chisel i.e X I V M.
How would you calculate 1776 plus 549 and 1776 minus 549 but working out both calculations entirely in Roman numerals with explanations?
The modern way of expressing 549 in Roman numerals is now DXLIX but the ancient Romans would have probably worked it out on an abacus calculating device as DXXXXVIIII and then abridged it to IDL in wrtten format thus facilitating the speed and ease of calculations as follows:-MDCCLXXVI+IDL = MMCCCXXV => 1776+(550-1) = 2325MDCCLXXVI-IDL = MCCXXVII => 17776-(550-1) = 1227Note that in mathematics -(550-1) becomes +1-550 and that if we were to use the elongated version of 549 instead of the abridged version the results would be exactly the same in both calculations.QED
