No
Yes and unlike the Hindu-Arabic numeral system a nought figure is not required for place value purposes because the place value of Roman numerals are self evident.
So as to read out the numerals in a logical descending order as for example MDCLXVI = 1666
It is O because it's not needed in the Roman numeral system for place value purposes as the place value of the numerals are self evident
Yes and a nought figure is not needed to represent the positional place value of Roman numerals because their positional place values are self evident.
No
The place value of Roman numerals are self evident that's why the system doesn't need a zero figure for positional place value purposes which is essential in the Hindu-Arabic numeral system.
Yes and unlike the Hindu-Arabic numeral system a nought figure is not required for place value purposes because the place value of Roman numerals are self evident.
So as to read out the numerals in a logical descending order as for example MDCLXVI = 1666
It is O because it's not needed in the Roman numeral system for place value purposes as the place value of the numerals are self evident
Yes and a nought figure is not needed to represent the positional place value of Roman numerals because their positional place values are self evident.
No, the Roman numeral system is not a place value system. In the Roman numeral system, each individual symbol represents a specific value, and there is no concept of place value. Place value systems, such as the decimal system, rely on the position of digits within a number to determine their value.
A nought figure is not needed in the Roman numeral system because the positional place value of these numerals are self evident. A nought figure is needed in the Arabic numeral system (the numbers we use today) to identify the positional place value of these numerals.
Yes
It contains a zero figure for place value purposes thus limiting the size of numerals for a given value. Foe example in Hindu-Arabic numerals 88 only uses two numerals but the same value in Roman numerals is LXXXVIII which uses eight numerals.
Yes but unlike the Hindu-Arabic numeral system which requires a 0 symbol for positional place value purposes the Roman numeral system does not need a 0 symbol because the positional place value of these numerals are self evident.
Try adding 2 to 4 in Roman numerals: IV + II =? Or adding 1 to 8: VIII + I =?