Study guides

☆☆

Q: What is a number that the digits in the number are the same but not 2 digit number nor 3 digit number?

Write your answer...

Submit

Still have questions?

Related questions

51, 52, 53, 56, 57, 58, 59

pi is a transcendental number, which is a kind of irrational number. That means that the decimal representation of pi does not end (nor does it have a recurring sequence). There is, therefore, no last digit.

6

Single digit primes are 2, 3, 5, 7 Single digit squares are 1, 4, 9 Neither prime nor square are 0, 6, 8 None of that makes a difference if we can't figure out what a "grerate" is. I'll guess you want to know the greatest possible number given those conditions. That would be 985.

The key to solving this kind of problem is to use the largest digit you possibly can, starting at the left. For example, the largest even digit is 8, so you start with an 8. For the next digit - the second from left - you can't repeat the 8, nor any odd digit, so you need to use the next-largest even digit.

29

Basically, an integer is a number that does NOT have digits after the decimal point (nor should it have a fractional part).

21 is not divisible by 2 nor 5, but it is divisible by 3. To be divisible by 2 the last digit must be even (one of {0, 2, 4, 6, 8}; the last digit 1 is not one of these, thus 21 is not divisible by 2 To be divisible by 3 sum the digits and if this total is divisible by 3, then so is the original number; the test can be repeated on the sum, so by repeatedly summing the digits of the totals until a single digit remains only if that single digit is 3, 6 or 9 is the original number divisible by 3. 21 → 2 + 1 = 3 which is divisible by 3 so 21 is divisible by 3. To be divisible by 5, the last digit must be 0 or 5. The last digit of 21 is 1 which is not 0 nor 5, thus 21 is not divisible by 5.

9.565565556 = 9565565556/1000000000 = 2391391389/250000000 So it is rational. However, if you mean 9.565565556... where it continues with one more 5 than last time followed by a 6 and so on forever, then no, it is not a rational. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The decimal form of a rational number either terminates or continues with the same one or more digits repeating, eg 1.5, 1.333..., 1.1818181..., 1.1666..., 1.1565656... are all rational numbers. If the decimal does not terminate nor continue forever with the same repeating digit(s) then the number is irrational. 9.565565556 as written terminates and so it a rational number. 9.565565556... does not terminate nor does it continue with the same repeating digits (as an extra 5 is inserted before the next 6), so it it irrational.

There is one significant figure (which I assume you are referring to).However there are 7 digits involved, of which all are significant. Each digit is important and special in its own right. None should be singled out as being different, as that is Digitist.* * * * *Leaving aside the political correctness of the anti-digitism, the number of significant digits depends on the context. In the above example, if it is known that the number is not 3,999,999 nor 4,000,001 then all seven digits are significant. If it is known that the number is 4,000 thousand (not 3,999 thousand or 4,001 thousand) then there are 4 sig digs.

No. To be divisible by 6 the number must be divisible by both 2 and 3. To be divisible by 2, the last digit of the number must be even (ie one of {0, 2, 4, 6, 8}). The last digit of 35 is 5 which is not even and so 35 is not divisible by 2. To be divisible by 3, sum the digits of the number and if this sum is divisible by 3 then so is the original number. As the test can be applied to the sum, repeatedly summing the digits of the sums until a single digit remains, then the original number is divisible by 3 only if this single digit is one of {3, 6, 9}. For 35 3 + 5 = 8 which is not divisible by 3 (nor is is one of {3, 6, 9}, thus 35 is not divisible by 3. As 35 is not divisible by both 2 and 3 (in fact it is divisible by neither 2 nor 3) it is not divisible by 6.

To be divisible by 2 the number must be even, that is its last digit must be 2, 4, 6, 8, or 0; the last digit of 26 is 6 which is one of {2, 4, 6, 8, 0} so 26 is even and divisible by 2. To be divisible by 3 sum the digits of the number; if this sum is divisible by 3 then the original number is divisible by 3. The test can be repeated on the sum until a single digit remains, in which case if this single digit is 3, 6, or 9 then the original number is divisible by 3; For 26: 2 + 6 = 8 which is not one of {3, 6, 9} so 26 is not divisible by 3. To be divisible by 5 the last digit must be a 0 or 5; the last digit of 26 is a 6 which is not 0 nor 5, so 26 is not divisible by 5. To be divisible by 9 sum the digits of the number; if this sum is divisible by 9 then the original number is divisible by 9. The test can be repeated on the sum until a single digit remains, in which case if this single digit is 9 then the original number is divisible by 9; For 26: 2 + 6 = 8 which is not 9 so 26 is not divisible by 9. 26 is divisible by 2 but not divisible by 3, 5 nor 9.

No. To be divisible by 5 the last digit of the number must be one of {0, 5}. As the last digit of 7529 is neither 0 nor 5, it is not divisible by 5.

144 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 and not divisible by 5 or 10.Divisible by 2The whole number is divisible by 2 if the number is even which is shown by the last digit being divisible by 2. The last digit of 144 is 4 and 4 is divisible by 2, thus 144 is divisible by 2.Divisible by 3The number is divisible by 3 if the sum of its digits is also divisible by 3. Sum of the digits of 144 is 1+4+4 = 9 which is divisible by 3, thus 144 is divisible by 3Divisible by 4The number is divisible by 4 is the last two digits is also divisible by 4. Last two digits of 144 are 44 which are divisible by 4, thus 144 is divisible by 4An alternative test: If the last digit plus twice the preceding digit is divisible by 4 then the whole number is divisible by 4.For 144, last digit + twice preceding digit is 4+2x4 = 12 which is divisible by 4, so 144 is divisible by 4Divisible by 5If the last digit is 0 or 5 then the number is divisible by 5 Last digit of 144 is 4 which is neither 0 nor 5, thus 144 is not divisible by 5Divisible by 6To be divisible by 6, the number must be divisible by both of 2 and 3. 144 is divisible by both 2 and 3 (see above), thus 144 is divisible by 6Divisible by 9If the sum of the digits of the number is divisible by 9, then the original number is divisible by 9. For 144, 1+4+4 = 9 which is divisible by 9, thus 144 is divisible by 9Divisible by 10To be divisible by 10, the last digit must be 0. The last digit of 144 is 4 which is not 0, thus 144 is not divisible by 10

756000000. you look at the 6, (the millions digit), and look at the digit to the right of it (2). This number is mot 5 nor more than five so the 6 stays the same and starting from the 2, everything turns to zeros (756000000) hope this helps :)

4 is not divisible by any 3-digit number. Nor are 5, 11 or 3. The smallest positive numbers that is divisible by 4, 5, 11 and 3 is 660.

97A prime number has only 2 factors which are 1 and itself. Composite numbers are everything else except 1 and 0. 1 and 0 are neither prime, nor composite. 97 is the largest 2 digit prime number.

If it is a multiple of 4. To check if a number is divisible by 4, first it must be even (end in one of the digits 0, 2, 4, 6, 8). Then add twice the tens digit to the ones digit; if this sum is divisible by 4 then so is the original number. As the test can be applied to the sum, repeat the summing until a single digit remains; if this digit is 4 or 8 then the original number is divisible by 4. eg 123456789 is not divisible by 4 as it is odd (ends in one of the digits 1, 3, 5, 7, 9). eg 123456798: 2x9 + 8 = 26; 2x2 + 6 = 10; 2x1 + 0 = 2 which is not 4 nor 8, so 123456798 is not divisible by 4. eg 123987564: 2x6 + 4 = 16; 2x1 + 6 = 8 which is 4 or 8, so 123876564 is divisible by 4.

To be divisible by 2 the number must be even, that is its last digit must be 2, 4, 6, 8, or 0; the last digit of 432 is 2 which is one of {2, 4, 6, 8, 0} so 432 is even and divisible by 2. To be divisible by 3 sum the digits of the number; if this sum is divisible by 3 then the original number is divisible by 3. The test can be repeated on the sum until a single digit remains, in which case if this single digit is 3, 6, or 9 then the original number is divisible by 3; For 432: 4 + 3 + 2 = 9 which is one of {3, 6, 9} so 432 is divisible by 3. To be divisible by 5 the last digit must be a 0 or 5; the last digit of 432 is a 2 which is not 0 nor 5, so 432 is not divisible by 5. To be divisible by 6, the number must be divisible by both 2 and 3; these have been tested above and found to be true, so 432 is divisible by 6. To be divisible by 9 sum the digits of the number; if this sum is divisible by 9 then the original number is divisible by 9. The test can be repeated on the sum until a single digit remains, in which case if this single digit is 9 then the original number is divisible by 9; For 432: 4 + 3 + 2 = 9 which is 9 so 432 is divisible by 9 To be divisible by 10 the last digit must be a 0; the last digit of 432 is a 2 which is not 0, so 432 is not divisible by 10. 432 is divisible by 2, 3, 6 and 9, but not divisible by 5 nor 10.

Any of them. A decimal number is simply a way of representing a number in such a way that the place value of each digit is ten times that of the digit to its right. A decimal representation does not require a decimal point, nor does it require a fractional part.

Apart from the fact that there is no such thing as a "pime" number, none of the numbers shown are prime nor 2-digit.

I could be a smart alec and suggest: 369129637. The question does not imply nor does the format suggest that there are any operations being performed on the individual digits of the 'number'.

Rational numbers are those decimals which either terminate or end in a repeating sequence of 1 or more digits. Assuming the number continues with an extra 0 before the next 8 each time then the number neither terminates nor ends in a sequence of repeating digits, thus it is not a rational number.

-11101

Leading 0s are not significant digits, nor are trailing 0s after a decimal point in some situations. For example in 01000.01000, the first 0 is not significant as it can be left off without impacting the number. The final three 0s can be significant in some cirmcumstances, such as precise scientific measurements, or non-significant as they do not alter the number's value of 1000.01