A quotient of integers is the result of dividing one integer by another. When dividing two integers, the result may be a whole number if the division is exact, or a decimal/fraction if there is a remainder. For example, when dividing 10 by 2, the quotient is 5, which is also an integer.
No; 3/4 is rational but not an integer.
Yes. All numbers are rational numbers except repeating decimals like 1.3(repeating). * * * * * Repeating decimals are also rationals. However, the quotient is not defined if the second number is the integer zero!
No. Integers are counting numbers, or whole numbers.Only squares of integers (e.g. 4, 9, 16, 25) can have integer roots.Square roots of numbers that are not squares of integers are also not rational numbers, because they have repeating or non-repeating decimal extensions.
Any number which is a whole number (0, 8, 87, 453 ...and so) is an integer. Technically, integers also include negative whole numbers but it is unlikely that this is of concern in relation to this question. In a percentage expression such as 23%, 76% then 23 and 76 are integers. With expressions such as 14.6%, 51.9% then the numbers are not integers. The result of a percentage calculation may result in an integer solution, 14.5% of 5800 = 841 even though one of the terms is a non-integer number. Equally, a calculation can result in a non-integer solution even when the opening terms are all integers such as 17% of 53 = 9.01
A quotient of integers is the result of dividing one integer by another. When dividing two integers, the result may be a whole number if the division is exact, or a decimal/fraction if there is a remainder. For example, when dividing 10 by 2, the quotient is 5, which is also an integer.
No, they are not because fractions can be negative also. fractions aren't integers
'Rational' in a mathematic sense means 'can be written as a finite fraction'. Since you can obviously write a fraction as a fraction - by a triviality - it is rational. Rational numbers also include the integers; however these can also be written as fractions in the form a/1, so technically every rational number is a fraction.Note to the author of the above quote: - I don't believe that is correct. Here's why:A fraction is a number that expresses part of a whole as a quotient of integers (where the denominator is not zero).A rational number is a number that can be expressed as a quotient of integers (where the denominator is not zero), or as a repeating or terminating decimal. Every fraction fits the first part of that definition. Therefore, every fraction is a rational number.But even though every fraction is a rational number, not every rational number is a fraction.Why? Consider this:Every integer (all the whole numbers, including zero, and their negatives....-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3...) is a rational number, because it can be expressed as a quotient of integers, as in the case of 4 = 8/2 or 1 = 3/3 or -3 = 3/-1 and so on. So integers such as 4 or 1 can be expressed as the quotient of integers.But an integer is not a fraction. 4 is an integer, but it is not a fraction. 4 is not expressed as the quotient of integers. The difference here is in the wording.A fraction is a number that expresses part of a whole. An integer does not express a part. It only expresses a whole number.A rational number is a number that can be expressed as a quotient of integers, or as part of a whole, but fraction is a number that is (must be) expressed as a quotient of integers, or as part of a whole - there is a difference. The difference is subtle, but it is real.In a nutshell, the fractions are a subset of the rational numbers. The rational numbers contain the integers, and fractions don't.
Of not being equal to zero. Also, of being closed under division.
Yes but a double negative integer is also positive as for example --2 = +2
noNo. There are positive and negative integers. Zero is also an integer.-----------------------An integer simply means a whole number/value. It shouldn't matter whether it is positive or negative.
No; 3/4 is rational but not an integer.
Yes. All numbers are rational numbers except repeating decimals like 1.3(repeating). * * * * * Repeating decimals are also rationals. However, the quotient is not defined if the second number is the integer zero!
An integer is a whole number. Some examples are 0, 1, 2, 3, etc. Negative whole numbers are also integers, e.g. -5. Add integers means take two or more integers and add them together. For example, 1+2=3 is an example of adding two integers (1 and 2) to get 3. Notice that 3 is also an integer. Adding integers together will always result in another integer. More than one integer can be added together. For example: 1+2+3=6.
If we insist on the condition that all the numbers must be integers... The only way this can happen is if the quotient and one of the other numbers are negative. For example, if the original numbers are -4 and 2, then their sum is -2, and the quotient of -4 divided by 2 is also -2. I believe that's the only integer example of a set of numbers satisfying that criterion.
The sum of zero and a negative integer can never be zero - it will always be negative and nonzero. Although zero is also an integer, it is neither negative nor positive and cannot be the other integer used.
an integer is not a decimal or fraction in other words just a fancy name for a whole number negative whole numbers are also integers