you have imath twice at the end.What am I doing wrong that i am getting that at the end?
But there are hash marks, what am I missing? If you see 9 hash marks between 0 and 10 you probably assume that they represent 1, 2, 3, ... Why? Apply the same reasoning to the 2 hash marks between 0 and 1.There needs to be an explanation as to how they expect students to answer it without the hashmarks.
I did after what pka explained to me. I meant that all the hash marks were not there like in any number line that is totally marked and numberedBut there are hash marks, what am I missing? If you see 9 hash marks between 0 and 10 you probably assume that they represent 1, 2, 3, ... Why? Apply the same reasoning to the 2 hash marks between 0 and 1.
you have imath twice at the endnope only once and it is not coming out well.
Sorry, butI did after what pka explained to me. I meant that all the hash marks were not there like in any number line that is totally marked and numbered
I see what you mean now, and it is right.Sorry, but
1. Hash marks were there
2. 3 of them are numbered: 0, 1, 2. Look at any ruler - most of hash marks are not labeled. It's perfectly reasonable to label only some of them as long as unlabeled marks divide the number line into segments of equal length.
Sorry to keep pointing this out, but it seems like there is some misunderstanding going on.
The hash marks are present in your OP.How can we find the fraction without the marks on the number line?
thanks for any hint.
Yes, they are. My confusion was about the fractional thing. how to locate the fraction, but the hash marks should have not been mentioned become like lev said the markers do not need to have numbers in all marksThe hash marks are present in your OP.
Why is the question of "without the marks" coming up?
Your bracket after the last curly bracket is the wrong way around.[imath]3\frac{1}{3}]/imath][/imath]