if they are both negative, add like they are positive numbers, but just add the negative sign.
To subtract negative integers, you can convert the subtraction into addition by changing the sign of the negative integer. For example, subtracting -3 is the same as adding 3: ( a - (-b) = a + b ). To find the distance between two integers, simply calculate the absolute difference between them using the formula ( |a - b| ), which gives you a positive number representing the distance irrespective of their order.
To determine the number of ways to write a sum that equals 23, we need to consider how many distinct integers or combinations of integers can be added together to reach that total. The number of ways can vary significantly depending on the restrictions placed on the integers (e.g., positive integers, negative integers, or allowing repetitions). Without specific constraints, there are infinitely many combinations, such as using different positive integers that add up to 23, or including negative integers. If the context is more specific, such as using a fixed number of addends or only positive integers, the answer would require further details.
Yes - depending, of course, how you define "whole number". Because there is not a single definition, it is better to avoid using the term "whole numbers" (except for the initial, informal, explanations), and instead talk about "integers", "positive integers", "non-negative integers", etc., depending what you are talking about.
No, a factorial cannot be defined for negative numbers. The factorial function, denoted as ( n! ), is only defined for non-negative integers, where ( n! = n \times (n-1) \times (n-2) \times \ldots \times 1 ). For negative integers, the factorial is undefined because there is no way to multiply a descending sequence of positive integers that begins from a negative number. The concept of factorial can be extended to non-integer values using the Gamma function, but it remains undefined for negative integers.
assume that whatever integers you are using are the variables in this. If you haven't been given integers, assume (for the sake of simplicity) that they are one. a * b * c * d * e * f = x -a * b * c * d * e * f = -x -a * -b * c * d * e * f = x -a * -b * -c * d * e * f = -x see a pattern? any ODD number of negative integers will lead to a negative answer, therefore with the limit being 6, the answer will be 5.
Yes - depending, of course, how you define "whole number". Because there is not a single definition, it is better to avoid using the term "whole numbers" (except for the initial, informal, explanations), and instead talk about "integers", "positive integers", "non-negative integers", etc., depending what you are talking about.
No, a factorial cannot be defined for negative numbers. The factorial function, denoted as ( n! ), is only defined for non-negative integers, where ( n! = n \times (n-1) \times (n-2) \times \ldots \times 1 ). For negative integers, the factorial is undefined because there is no way to multiply a descending sequence of positive integers that begins from a negative number. The concept of factorial can be extended to non-integer values using the Gamma function, but it remains undefined for negative integers.
assume that whatever integers you are using are the variables in this. If you haven't been given integers, assume (for the sake of simplicity) that they are one. a * b * c * d * e * f = x -a * b * c * d * e * f = -x -a * -b * c * d * e * f = x -a * -b * -c * d * e * f = -x see a pattern? any ODD number of negative integers will lead to a negative answer, therefore with the limit being 6, the answer will be 5.
The integers are -6, -5 and -4 OR -7, -5 and -3 using only consecutive odd integers.
the answer depends on what kind of numbers you are dealing with. If you are using only integers then there is no answer to this question. Integers are numbers without decimals, both negative, positive and zero. If you are using real numbers (which includes decimals), then then there are an infinite number of possibilities between 1 and 0 (ie. 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.87, 0.6543 etc..).
The question is incomplete. How does knowledge of integers on a number line WHAT when using a coordinate plane? Help? compromise? confuse? handicap?The question is incomplete. How does knowledge of integers on a number line WHAT when using a coordinate plane? Help? compromise? confuse? handicap?The question is incomplete. How does knowledge of integers on a number line WHAT when using a coordinate plane? Help? compromise? confuse? handicap?The question is incomplete. How does knowledge of integers on a number line WHAT when using a coordinate plane? Help? compromise? confuse? handicap?
The set of natural numbers (counting numbers) {1,2,3,4....} corresponds to the positive integers. Note that the number 0 is neither positive nor negative. So anytime you want to count something you use natural numbers, which means you are also using positive integers.
No NEETs are counted using positive integers.No NEETs are counted using positive integers.No NEETs are counted using positive integers.No NEETs are counted using positive integers.
It is the position of the number zero.
18/10
That's a 'rational' number.
5/10