Yes, there is.
No "largest" composite number exists.
First divide the perimeter by 2 then subtract the diagonal from this. The number left with must equal two numbers that when squared and added together equals the diagonal when squared (Pythagoras' theorem) These numbers will then be the length and height of the rectangle.
No "largest" composite number exists.
Probably the ancient Egyptians who discovered that the diagonal of a unit square was not a rational number. And then discovered other such numbers.
Irrational numbers have been known since very early times. For example, it was recognised that the length of the diagonal of a unit square was not a rational number.
There is only one even prime number that exists. That number is 2.
all the numbers you put must all add up to 15 vertical, horizontal and diagonal.
25.5 is the median of these two numbers (the number that exists halfway between these two numbers).
zero, because for every positive number, there exists a negative.
One number does not make a pattern - no matter how big it is. No pattern so no next numbers in the pattern.
There is no number pattern in 781013. But there is a number pattern in the numbers 7, 8, 10, 13. 7+1=8 8+2=10 10+3=13 Can you see the pattern? And the next number in this sequence would be ... ?
A sequence is an ordered set of numbers. There may be a rule governing the sequence such that, if you know the numbers in the sequence up to a particular point, the rule will allow you to deduce the value of the next number in the sequence. That rule - if it exists - is the sequential pattern.