Yes, it is.
No, the square root of 166 is not a rational number. A rational number can be expressed as a fraction of two integers, but the square root of 166 is an irrational number because it cannot be simplified to such a form. Its decimal representation is non-repeating and non-terminating, approximately equal to 12.845.
No because it is a ratio of two integers (that's what "rational" means) 166/100
As much as, in these days of uncertainty, anything can be anything. As long as the constraints of a rational number are kept to, a rational number will always remain a rational number.
The decimal number 166 can be represented as a binary number by converting it through repeated division by 2. The binary equivalent of 166 is 10100110. This means that in binary, 166 is composed of 1s and 0s that represent powers of 2.
Yes, but only if the rational number is 0.
No, the square root of 166 is not a rational number. A rational number can be expressed as a fraction of two integers, but the square root of 166 is an irrational number because it cannot be simplified to such a form. Its decimal representation is non-repeating and non-terminating, approximately equal to 12.845.
If the 6's continue, it is -5/3, and therefore it is rational. If they do not continue, it is -166/100, and still rational.
No because it is a ratio of two integers (that's what "rational" means) 166/100
It is 332/15.
It is a rational number. It can be written as a fraction.
yes
Is 12.05 a rational number or irrational number?
1.96 is a rational number
It is a rational number, as it can be written as a fraction.
Yes, the sum is always rational.
There is no such thing as a number that is both rational and irrational. By definition, every number is either rational or irrational.
As much as, in these days of uncertainty, anything can be anything. As long as the constraints of a rational number are kept to, a rational number will always remain a rational number.