- #1
The Rev
- 81
- 0
Sorry if this is the most elementary question ever, but hey, I gots ta know man!
Is the number 2.3 even or odd?
The Rev
Is the number 2.3 even or odd?
The Rev
Actually, they are used for all integers.Evo said:The terms “even number” and “odd number” are only used for whole numbers.
Yes, but that's what I was referring to. I guess that's not as clear though.Gokul43201 said:Actually, they are used for all integers.
[tex]for~n~\epsilon ~ \mathbb{Z},~~n = 2k,~~k~ \epsilon ~ \mathbb {Z} => n~even,~~else ~ n ~odd[/tex]
HallsofIvy said:Friedrich Engels (co-author of the "Communist Manifesto" with Karl Marx!), toward the end of his life, was working on a book applying "material dialectic" to the philosophy of science and mathematics. How much he actually understood of science and mathematics himself may be indicated by this:
He argued that the concept of "even" and "odd" was not a proper mathematical concept because it depended on the base! The number "8" in base 10 is even, but in base 5 it is "13", which is odd!
Gokul43201 said:Forgive my naivete' (I'm a math ignoramus), but I didn't know that the fundamental theorem held outside the naturals. Is the proof of this a trivial extension of the proof of uniqueness (of factorization) within the naturals ?
Gokul43201 said:What I wanted to prove is that the factorization is unique. A little thinking (which I was lazy to do, the first time) has led me to believe that the proof of the fundamental theorem (through Bezout's Identity) can be extended to the rationals without too much trouble. So forget I asked.
Of course it does.CRGreathouse said:I was just showing that factoring them in the way I described makes the factorization unique...
I hope someone answers, because I think such distinctions fail for infinite sets. Consider the set of positive integers N and the set of nonnegative integers M. Every member of N is a member of M and there is exactly one member of M (0) which isn't a member of N, so N is a proper subset of M. However, N and M are bijective (consider the function f(x) = x + 1 from M to N). So in what way can M have more members than N?Icebreaker said:If 0 is even, then can we say that there's exactly 1 more even number than odd?
Icebreaker said:If 0 is even, then can we say that there's exactly 1 more even number than odd?
The number 2.3 is neither even nor odd. It is a decimal number and does not fit into the categories of even or odd numbers.
The number 2.3 is significant because it is a part of the decimal number system and represents a fraction between 2 and 3. It is also an irrational number, meaning it cannot be expressed as a ratio of two integers.
No, the number 2.3 cannot be simplified as it is already in its simplest form as a decimal number.
In the binary number system, 2.3 is represented as 10.0100110011... and in the hexadecimal number system, it is represented as 2.4C.
The decimal point in 2.3 separates the whole number (2) from the decimal part (0.3). This allows us to represent fractions and values between integers in the decimal number system.