10
Dodging numbers may be missing numbers in a sequence. For example, the underscore in the following sequence represents such a number: 2, 4, _ , 8, 10.
The pattern in the given sequence is multiplying each number by 10. So, the next numbers in the sequence would be obtained by multiplying 120 by 10, resulting in 1200, and then multiplying 1200 by 10, yielding 12000. Therefore, the next numbers in the sequence would be 1200 and 12000.
27. But that continues the sequence, it does not complete it.
Even numbers.
Consider the sequence (a_i) where a_i is pi rounded to the i_th decimal place. This sequence clearly contains only rational numbers since every number in it has a finite decimal expansion. Furthermore this sequence is Cauchy since a_i and a_j can differ at most by 10^(-min(i,j)) or something which can be made arbitrarily small by choosing a lower bound for i and j. Now note that this sequence converges to pi in the reals, so it can not converge in the set of rational numbers. Therefore the rational numbers allow a non-convergent Cauchy sequence and are thus by definition not complete.
numbers
10
27 BUT, as far as I can tell, it does not complete the sequence which can continue further.
50 Each term in the sequence is 5 times the previous term.
1, 4, 7, 10, 13, …
Dodging numbers may be missing numbers in a sequence. For example, the underscore in the following sequence represents such a number: 2, 4, _ , 8, 10.
The pattern in the given sequence is multiplying each number by 10. So, the next numbers in the sequence would be obtained by multiplying 120 by 10, resulting in 1200, and then multiplying 1200 by 10, yielding 12000. Therefore, the next numbers in the sequence would be 1200 and 12000.
If the sequence matters: 720If the sequence doesn't matter: 120
5
75
27. But that continues the sequence, it does not complete it.