2006-07-26 00:20:27 · 11 answers · asked by hemi 1 in Education & Reference ➔ Teaching
one--is the lonely-est number-la la la la la
2006-07-26 00:28:24 · answer #1 · answered by gemini~~~marie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Digits are 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. The smallest is 0. If you have the numer 14,708 and ask the place of the smallest digit, you would have to say the tens place because of the zero.
2006-07-26 07:54:06 · answer #2 · answered by Mike S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who says there are basically 9 single digits? For there to be single digits, there might desire to be digits different than single by using which to tell apart themselves. consequently, there might desire to be any style of single digits interior the universe (what proportion 'numbers' or divisions are there between 0 and a million) yet there might desire to continuously be a 'constrained' selection, and this way of 'selection' might invite the comparable form of questions. As for the institutions with the selection 9, that has to do with its assocation because of the fact the final 'single' digit because it quite is typical. consequently, it takes on the metaphoric and symbolic meaning of being an 'end' to the guy, and the commencing up of being portion of a team, a team that grows on into continuously. If the final single digit grew to become into typical as kefit, kefit might take on the symbolic and metaphoric magnitude that 9 has now. A rose by using the different call...
2016-12-10 14:45:12 · answer #3 · answered by Erika 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the 0, is larger in "size" in this font.
The 1 is rather skinny.
As far as mathmatically, 0 is the absense of anything. 1 would be the smallest amount in whole numbers of something that you could have. So I will have to go with 1.
2006-07-26 00:24:34 · answer #4 · answered by bradyb 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
0
0-9 are the digits in the decimal system (as opposed to 0-1 in binary).
2006-07-26 01:56:15 · answer #5 · answered by Huerter0 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
for me 0
2006-07-26 00:26:50 · answer #6 · answered by Aelon 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would've thought 0. But now that you ask, Im beginning to wonder if its not! Me not being a maths whizzkid, and never been, I dont know then...
2006-07-26 00:26:48 · answer #7 · answered by Matrix 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
0
1 is next.
Trying to teach the computer about 2 was cause for concern at the dawning of this new millennium.
So far, computer is still learning.
2006-07-26 00:26:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
-9
2006-07-26 00:26:57 · answer #9 · answered by happu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both are the same.
2006-07-26 00:25:34 · answer #10 · answered by trunchiator 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋