Yes.
-(√4) =-(2) = -2
Negative two is an integer.
Yes.
Yes because the square root of 16 is 4
Radical numbers are not necessarily integers; they include any number that can be expressed as the root of a non-negative integer. For example, the square root of 4 is 2, which is an integer, but the square root of 2 is an irrational number and not an integer. Therefore, while some radical numbers can be integers, many are not.
The square root of 18, rounded to the nearest integer, is 4.
Yes, and it is 4
The square root of 4 is 2 (and -2) and is an integer.
Yes, because the square root of 16 is 4 and as a whole number it is an integer
Yes.
Yes because the square root of 16 is 4
Radical numbers are not necessarily integers; they include any number that can be expressed as the root of a non-negative integer. For example, the square root of 4 is 2, which is an integer, but the square root of 2 is an irrational number and not an integer. Therefore, while some radical numbers can be integers, many are not.
The root of a perfect square will be an integer, but will be both the positive and negative values. For instance, the square root of 4 is plus or minus 2 (±2), as both integral answers are valid. The positive real root is the answer that many books give. It is sometimes called the primary root. But the key point is both roots are valid.
no.No. The square root of 5 is an irrational number. The two closest numbers with integer square roots are 4 (with a square root of 2) and 9 (with a square root of 3). Since there are no integers between 2 and 3 and 5 lies between 4 and 9, it's pretty evident that it can't have an integer square root.
The square root of 18, rounded to the nearest integer, is 4.
Yes, and it is 4
4.123105626 rounds down to 4
It depends on whether you take the positive square root of 4 (YES) or the negative square root of 4 (No).
Yes. For example, the square root of 1 is 1, and the square root of 4 is 2.