Not being rational. Not thinking nor acting in a clearly logical and easy to follow manner. Not making any sense with your decisions on how to react the current problem at hand. Being impulsive.
0.5555 is rational. If, however, you meant 0.5555..., meaning the 5's repeat forever, then it is irrational.
No: there is no such word as inational. And if you meant irrational, the answer is still no. They are not.
A rational number can be expressed as a fraction whereas an irrational number can't.
The answer to the question is 0 since there are infinitely many positive irrational numbers between 1 and 10.Assuming you meant positive integers, the answer is 4/8 = 1/2.The answer to the question is 0 since there are infinitely many positive irrational numbers between 1 and 10.Assuming you meant positive integers, the answer is 4/8 = 1/2.The answer to the question is 0 since there are infinitely many positive irrational numbers between 1 and 10.Assuming you meant positive integers, the answer is 4/8 = 1/2.The answer to the question is 0 since there are infinitely many positive irrational numbers between 1 and 10.Assuming you meant positive integers, the answer is 4/8 = 1/2.
No such word as "errational". If you meant "irrational" then a synonym would be 'unhinged', 'mad', 'loopy', 'impulsive', 'unreasonable', 'unsound'.
Irrational. Irrational. Irrational. Irrational.
It is irrational.
Rational
A rational number is any number that does not have an infinite number of digits. So, as you wrote it, 2.8333333 is a rational number. However, if you meant the 3s to go on forever (as in the number 2.8 + 1/30), that would be an irrational number.
Such a sum is always irrational.
If it says "negative irrational", then obviously it is irrational.
No