No.
The latter which would be an irrational number that cannot be expressed as a fraction.
215 is a terminating decimal, as it does not repeat infinitely. It can be written as 215.000000... or 215.
Any rational number is either a repeating decimal, or a terminating decimal.
Any terminating or repeating decimal number can be converted easily into the form of p/q: a ratio of two integers. If it can be written in that form then it is rational.
Because terminating or repeating decimals can be written as the quotient of two integers a/b, where b is not equal to zero.
as non-repeating, non-terminating.
The latter which would be an irrational number that cannot be expressed as a fraction.
It is terminating - after two decimal digits.
It is terminating - after three decimal digits.
No.
215 is a terminating decimal, as it does not repeat infinitely. It can be written as 215.000000... or 215.
Irrational numbers are a subset of real numbers which cannot be written in the form of a ratio of two integers. A consequence is that their decimal representation is non-terminating and non-repeating.
Any rational number is either a repeating decimal, or a terminating decimal.
If the decimal is terminating or repeating then it can be written as a fraction. Decimal representations which are non-terminating and non-repeating cannot be expressed as a fraction.
The square root of 61 is a non-repeating, non-terminating decimal and cannot be written as the ratio of two integers.
Any terminating or repeating decimal number can be converted easily into the form of p/q: a ratio of two integers. If it can be written in that form then it is rational.
It is not necessarily possible. The value of any irrational number, for example, can be written approximately as a non-terminating, non-repeating decimal but you cannot know all its digits.