No.
The latter which would be an irrational number that cannot be expressed as a fraction.
As written, it's terminating.
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.
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.
As written, it's terminating.
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.
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.
Any rational number is either a repeating decimal, or a terminating decimal.
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.