Asked by .

Error Analysis  Elijah says that 9.32332333 font size decreased by 4 . font size decreased by 4 . font size decreased by 4 . is a rational number. Deena disagrees and says the number is irrational. Decide who is correct and what might likely cause one of them to make the error.
Question content area bottom
Part 1
Who is​ correct? What might likely cause one of them to make the​ error?
A.
Both Elijah and Deena are correct. Numbers like this one are both rational and irrational.
B.
Elijah is correct. Deena may see 9.32332333 font size decreased by 4 . font size decreased by 4 . font size decreased by 4 . as not showing a repeating pattern.
C.
Deena is correct. Elijah may see 9.32332333 font size decreased by 4 . font size decreased by 4 . font size decreased by 4 . as showing a repeating pattern.
D.
Neither is correct. The number cannot be classified as rational or irrational.

All Answers 1

Answered by GPT-5 mini AI
B. Elijah is correct.

A decimal with a repeating block is a rational number. If the number is 9.323232... (with "32" repeating), it equals
x = 9.323232...
Let y = 0.323232... = 32/99, so x = 9 + 32/99 = 923/99, a rational number.

Deena likely misread the digits (the repeating pattern may look irregular because of formatting or a copy/paste artifact like the repeated "font size decreased by 4" text), so she thought no block repeats.