58 is an integer and not a fraction. However, it can be expressed in rational form as 58/1.
Is 5.8 an irrational number
5.8% = 5.8/100 = 58/1000 = 29/500
No, it is rational.
It is rational. It is rational. It is rational. It is rational.
58 is rational.
58 is an integer and not a fraction. However, it can be expressed in rational form as 58/1.
Is 5.8 an irrational number
If that is a terminating decimal: 0.58585858 = 58585858/100000000 = 29292929/50000000 And thus a rational number If it's a recurring decimal: 0.58585858... = 58/99 And thus a rational number
5.8% = 5.8/100 = 58/1000 = 29/500
0.58 is a fraction. It is a fraction in decimal form rather than in the form of a ratio. However, that does not stop it being a fraction. Its rational equivalent is 58/100 which can be simplified, if required.
It is indeed a rational number. Do you know the definition of a rational number? It is a number which can be exactly obtained by dividing one integer into another integer. -5.8 can be obtained exactly by dividing -58 by 10. It doesn't matter that -58 is a negative number. It is still a whole number, otherwise known as an integer. An example of an irrational number (not a rational number) is √2. This number can only be approximated (as 1.414… with as many decimal places as you desire); but it can not be exactly expressed as the ratio of two integers - as a rational number, that is. Another irrational number is π (pronounced 'pi'). It is approximately 3.14159 - but no number of decimal places will get it exactly; nor will the ratio of any two integers.
Rational
1.14 is rational.
4.6 is rational.
No, it is rational.
It is a rational number