Infinity is not a number in the ordinary sense of the word.
Chat with our AI personalities
1/infinity? * * * * * Nice idea but unfortunately that is not a rational number, which is defined as the ration of two integers, x/y where y > 0. Since infinity is not an integer, the suggested ratio is not a rational number. The correct answer is that there is no such number. If any number laid claim to being the smallest positive rational, then half of that number would have a better claim. And then a half of THAT number would be a positive rational that was smaller still. And so on.
As written, it is a terminating decimal, which can be converted to a quotient(fraction) . Hence it is rational. However, if 0.678667866678.... then it is recurring to infinity . , Since it will not convert to a quotient/fraction , then it is irrational.
Continuity is a characteristic of functions not of sets.The set of rational number is infinitely dense. This means that between any two rational numbers, no matter how close together, there are infinitely many rational numbers. And then, between any two of them these is an infinte number of rational numbers, and so on.But, in case that gives you any wrong ideas, between any two rational numbers there is an even higher order of infinity of irrational numbers. In that respect the number of gaps in the set of rational numbers (where the irrational numbers would be) is greater than the cardinality of rational numbers.Continuity is a characteristic of functions not of sets.The set of rational number is infinitely dense. This means that between any two rational numbers, no matter how close together, there are infinitely many rational numbers. And then, between any two of them these is an infinte number of rational numbers, and so on.But, in case that gives you any wrong ideas, between any two rational numbers there is an even higher order of infinity of irrational numbers. In that respect the number of gaps in the set of rational numbers (where the irrational numbers would be) is greater than the cardinality of rational numbers.Continuity is a characteristic of functions not of sets.The set of rational number is infinitely dense. This means that between any two rational numbers, no matter how close together, there are infinitely many rational numbers. And then, between any two of them these is an infinte number of rational numbers, and so on.But, in case that gives you any wrong ideas, between any two rational numbers there is an even higher order of infinity of irrational numbers. In that respect the number of gaps in the set of rational numbers (where the irrational numbers would be) is greater than the cardinality of rational numbers.Continuity is a characteristic of functions not of sets.The set of rational number is infinitely dense. This means that between any two rational numbers, no matter how close together, there are infinitely many rational numbers. And then, between any two of them these is an infinte number of rational numbers, and so on.But, in case that gives you any wrong ideas, between any two rational numbers there is an even higher order of infinity of irrational numbers. In that respect the number of gaps in the set of rational numbers (where the irrational numbers would be) is greater than the cardinality of rational numbers.
First of all , do not use the phrase ' not rational' . The word in the English language, and mathematics is 'IRRATIONAL'. Net 1.234 is rational; it can be converted to a ratio(fraction). For irrational numbers the decimals go to inifinity and there is no regular order in the decimal digits. 'pi' is probably the most well known irrational numbers at pi = 3.141592654... The three terminl dots/stops indicate to mathemticians, that the number goes to infinity. Notice also, there is no regular order of digits in the decimal moiety. Since the number given ends at '4' , then it does not go to infinity, hernce it is rational . To convert to a ratio (fraction) 1.234 = 1 234/1000 Cancel down by '2' 1 117/500 (THis is the fraction in its lowest terms).
yes