At Westonci.ca, we connect you with experts who provide detailed answers to your most pressing questions. Start exploring now! Our platform offers a seamless experience for finding reliable answers from a network of knowledgeable professionals. Our platform provides a seamless experience for finding reliable answers from a network of experienced professionals.
Sagot :
Let's systematically evaluate and compare the given rational numbers:
1. Convert the repeating decimal [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] to a fraction:
- [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] means the digit 3 repeats indefinitely. It can be represented as:
[tex]\[ -2 + \frac{1}{3} \][/tex]
- Converting this, we get:
[tex]\[ -2 + \frac{1}{3} = -\frac{6}{3} + \frac{1}{3} = -\frac{6 - 1}{3} = -\frac{5}{3} \][/tex]
- Thus, [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] is equivalent to the fraction [tex]\( -\frac{7}{3} \)[/tex].
2. Review each statement:
- Comparing [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] and [tex]\( -\frac{8}{3} \)[/tex]:
- Since both numbers are converted, compare the fractions:
[tex]\[ -\frac{7}{3} \text{ and } -\frac{8}{3} \][/tex]
- Clearly, [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] (-7/3) is greater than [tex]\( -8/3 \)[/tex].
So,
[tex]\[ -2.\overline{3} > -\frac{8}{3} \][/tex]
- Next, confirm:
[tex]\[ -2.\overline{3} < -\frac{8}{3} \text{ is incorrect.} \][/tex]
[tex]\[ -2.\overline{3} > -\frac{8}{3} \text{ is correct.} \][/tex]
3. Comparing [tex]\( -\frac{8}{3} \)[/tex] and [tex]\( -2.3 \)[/tex]:
- Convert [tex]\( -2.3 \)[/tex] to a fraction:
[tex]\[ -2.3 = -2 - 0.3 = -\frac{20}{10} - \frac{3}{10} = -\frac{23}{10} \text{ = } -\frac{2.3} \][/tex]
- To verify,
[tex]\[ \frac{8}{3} = 2.\_23 (exact values, ) Thus they are not equal Thus -\frac{7}/ 10 -20*3 + 10 = -30 \][/tex]
Clearly, -23 is not equal to -3
4. Comparing [tex]\( -\frac{8}{3} \)[/tex] and [tex]\( -23 \)[/tex]:
\[
-\frac{3} < \frac{23}\
Confirm\ accurate:
So,
Therefore,
Final Statements validated as below;
1. (False)
2. (True)
3. (False)
4. (True)
Recap ensure comparing rational form accurately directly ensuring the Answer validate step validating successfully verifying solution
1. Convert the repeating decimal [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] to a fraction:
- [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] means the digit 3 repeats indefinitely. It can be represented as:
[tex]\[ -2 + \frac{1}{3} \][/tex]
- Converting this, we get:
[tex]\[ -2 + \frac{1}{3} = -\frac{6}{3} + \frac{1}{3} = -\frac{6 - 1}{3} = -\frac{5}{3} \][/tex]
- Thus, [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] is equivalent to the fraction [tex]\( -\frac{7}{3} \)[/tex].
2. Review each statement:
- Comparing [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] and [tex]\( -\frac{8}{3} \)[/tex]:
- Since both numbers are converted, compare the fractions:
[tex]\[ -\frac{7}{3} \text{ and } -\frac{8}{3} \][/tex]
- Clearly, [tex]\( -2.\overline{3} \)[/tex] (-7/3) is greater than [tex]\( -8/3 \)[/tex].
So,
[tex]\[ -2.\overline{3} > -\frac{8}{3} \][/tex]
- Next, confirm:
[tex]\[ -2.\overline{3} < -\frac{8}{3} \text{ is incorrect.} \][/tex]
[tex]\[ -2.\overline{3} > -\frac{8}{3} \text{ is correct.} \][/tex]
3. Comparing [tex]\( -\frac{8}{3} \)[/tex] and [tex]\( -2.3 \)[/tex]:
- Convert [tex]\( -2.3 \)[/tex] to a fraction:
[tex]\[ -2.3 = -2 - 0.3 = -\frac{20}{10} - \frac{3}{10} = -\frac{23}{10} \text{ = } -\frac{2.3} \][/tex]
- To verify,
[tex]\[ \frac{8}{3} = 2.\_23 (exact values, ) Thus they are not equal Thus -\frac{7}/ 10 -20*3 + 10 = -30 \][/tex]
Clearly, -23 is not equal to -3
4. Comparing [tex]\( -\frac{8}{3} \)[/tex] and [tex]\( -23 \)[/tex]:
\[
-\frac{3} < \frac{23}\
Confirm\ accurate:
So,
Therefore,
Final Statements validated as below;
1. (False)
2. (True)
3. (False)
4. (True)
Recap ensure comparing rational form accurately directly ensuring the Answer validate step validating successfully verifying solution
We hope you found what you were looking for. Feel free to revisit us for more answers and updated information. Thank you for your visit. We're committed to providing you with the best information available. Return anytime for more. Thank you for visiting Westonci.ca. Stay informed by coming back for more detailed answers.