It seems that somebody told you that every fraction could be written as a whole number.
That person knew not whereof he spoke.
The smallest whole number is ' 1 '. "7 over 10" is 30 percent less than ' 1 '.
It doesn't have what it takes to be any whole number.
If every fraction could be written as a whole number, then nobody would need fractions.
If that's the mixed number 7 and 1/3, the whole number is 7.
3 over 7 is a fraction and is not equivalent to a whole number.
No because 7/9 is a fraction which is not a whole number
7/12 cant be a mixed number because it is less than a whole and a mixed number is at least a whole or higher.
Well, darling, 7 over 1 is just 7. It's like asking how many slices of cheesecake you want - you want the whole darn thing, not just a piece. So, in this case, the whole number of 7 over 1 is simply 7.
The reciprocal of 27/10 is 10/27
7 over 4 does not equate to a whole number.
33 over 7 does not equate to a whole number.
1/7 is a fraction and not a whole number. So it cannot be expressed as a whole number.
Since 52 is not divisible by 7, 52 over 7 is a mixed fraction. It cannot be written as a whole number for the simple reason that it is not a whole number.
If that's the mixed number 7 and 1/3, the whole number is 7.
3 over 7 is a fraction and is not equivalent to a whole number.
yes It depends upon the context. If "3 over 7" is intended to be a fraction, then it is not a whole number.
I have no clue
No because 7/9 is a fraction which is not a whole number
No, it is not.
No.