The statement is true.
No itβs not , as an integer is a number which is not a fraction or decimal. positive and negative numbers are integers for example: -3, 4, -106, 8756, etc
No because 2 is an even number which is also a Prime number that has only two factors which are itself and one.
false -apex life
No. 0.0000123 has three significant digits.
is every multiple of five a composite number true or false
Any terminating decimal is rational.
Yes. 5.0 (a terminating decimal) can be expressed as 4.9999... (a repeating decimal) That may be hard to believe but it is true, as proved by Georg Cantor.
In fact, the statement is true. Consequently, there is not a proper counterexample. The fallacy is in asserting that a terminating decimal is not a repeating decimal. First, there is the trivial argument that any terminating decimal can be written with a repeating string of trailing zeros. But, Cantor or Dedekind (I can't remember which) proved that any terminating decimal can also be expressed as a repeating decimal. For example, 2.35 can be written as 2.3499... Or 150,000 as 149,999.99... Thus, a terminating decimal becomes a recurring decimal. As a consequence, all real numbers can be expressed as infinite decimals. And that proves closure under addition.
It is false.0.2 * 25 = 5, which has no decimal places.
There cannot be a counterexample since the assertion is true. This requires you to accept the true fact that the terminating decimal 1.25, for example, is equivalent to the repeating decimal 1.25000... (or even 1.24999.... ).
False. 2 x 0.55 = 1.1
True
No, that is false.
12.8 It is the first number after decimal that determines which is greater
False
true
The statement is false.