What are the alternatives?
A. Less than 0,
B. 0
C. between 0 and 1,
D 1.
A base less than 0 runs into all sorts of difficulties with fractional powers, such as square roots. Best avoided until you are an expert in complex numbers.
The Base of 0 and 1 are not particularly helpful. 0 to any positive exponent is 0 and to any negative exponent is undefined. 1 is not much better, since 1 raised to any power is 1 and that would not take you very far.
The base could be between 0 and 1, but that would be the same as using its reciprocal as the base and switching the signs on the exponents. It is intuitively simpler to have the base greater than 1 so that the bigger the power, the bigger the number.
So, although C is possible, it has not advantage over using a base greater than 1.
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoNo, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.
no
It is because the index is related to the velocity of light in air (ideally vacuum) and the medium in question. Since the velocity of light in vacuum is greater than it can be in any other media, the index of refraction of these other media relative to the vacuum is greater than 1.However, if you studied light travelling through glass and then water, the index of refraction between those two would be 0.89 (approx).
greater than > less than < The small end points to the smaller value.
It is not, so the question is based on a fundamental misunderstanding.
An alkali (base).
The index of refraction tells you by which factor the speed of light in the medium is slower than in a vacuum. This value is 1 for a vacuum, and a number greater than 1 for other media. The exact value depends on the medium.
it is a base. So it is greater than <7
No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.No, it does not. It the quantity being measured is less than it was in the base period, ten the index will be less than 100.
5. It does not have a value greater than 12. Consequently, it does not have a value greater than 12 and less than 13.
In mathematics, when we comparing two values if any of the value has a larger value then the sign greater than is used for differentiating that the value is greater than the another value. > is the greater than sign, as in If x is greater than y,then x>y
Since they have the same unit you base which is more off of which has the biggest numerical value, and since 5 is greater than 3, 5 millimeters is greater.
roughly 10% lower than they were in the base year. lol Macroeconomics test
a strongly basic solution
The value of count should be more than max range of the for-loop. e.g. for (index=0;index<n;index++) ....In this case the count (i.e. index) would be more than "n" which is max-range.
no
yah! i think.....