It needs a zero figure in order to perform calculations and integers cannot be expressed in subtactive notation as the Roman numeral system as for example IM (1000-1 = 999) is the same as DCCCCLXXXXVIIIII (999) which uses less numerals but of equal value
1800. That is, 900 positive values (100 to 999) and another 900 negative values (-100 to -999).
888 when writing with roman numerals it is 12 characters long DCCCLXXXVIIIAnother answer:999 in Roman numerals in additional notation is DCCCCLXXXXVIIII which has 15 numerals.
All the numbers from 100 to 999 have three digits, as do all the numbers from -100 to -999, so that's 1800 in total.
CMXCIX.999 = CMXCIX
It needs a zero figure in order to perform calculations and integers cannot be expressed in subtactive notation as the Roman numeral system as for example IM (1000-1 = 999) is the same as DCCCCLXXXXVIIIII (999) which uses less numerals but of equal value
1800. That is, 900 positive values (100 to 999) and another 900 negative values (-100 to -999).
1800. That is, 900 positive values (100 to 999) and another 900 negative values (-100 to -999).
888 when writing with roman numerals it is 12 characters long DCCCLXXXVIIIAnother answer:999 in Roman numerals in additional notation is DCCCCLXXXXVIIII which has 15 numerals.
All the numbers from 100 to 999 have three digits, as do all the numbers from -100 to -999, so that's 1800 in total.
CMXCIX.999 = CMXCIX
bar(bar(CMXCIX)CMXCIX)CMXCIX
'CM' = 100 from 1,000 = 900 'XC' = 10 from 100 = 90 'IX' = 1 from 10 = 9 'CMXCIX' = 999
999
The number is 99 trillion 999 billion 999 million 999 thousand 999
Notwithstanding todays modern conversion of 999 into Roman numerals which is now considered to be CMXCIX inasmuch that the ancient Romans would have probably added together the equivalent of 777 and 999 in either of the following formats:- Abridged format: DCCLXXVII+IM = MDCCLXXVI => 777+(1000-1) = 1776 Elongated format: DCCLXXVII+DCCCCLXXXXVIIII = MDCCLXXVI => 777+999 = 1776 QED
Presumably, in order to make Roman numerals more compatible with Hindu-Arabic numerals that were being introduced into Western Europe in the Middle Ages we now consider the equivalent of 999 expressed in Roman numerals as CMXCIX but back in the time of the ancient Roman Empire its equivalent was probably worked out on an abacus counting frame as DCCCCLXXXXVIIII and expressed in written format as IM thus facilitating the speed and ease of the required calculations as follows:-MDCCLXXVI+IM = MMDCCLXXV => 1776+(1000-1) = 2775MDCCLXXVI-IM = DCCLXXVII => 1776-(1000-1) = 777Note that in mathematics -(1000-1) becomes -1000+1 and that if we were to use the longer version of 999 the results would be exactly the same in both calculations.QED