Isaiah says that the number below is a rational number because it has a repeating pattern. Do you agree? Use the drop-down menus to explain your answer.
7.787887888
ILL MARK BRAINLIEST

The number is not rational. We consider it irrational because the pattern does not repeat.

Yes we have elements of "7" and "8" showing up in a fairly predictable pattern; however, we don't have 78 repeating forever or 788 repeating forever, etc. Instead, the string of "8"s appear to grow by 1 digit each time we get to a new block.

So again, we have an illusion of a pattern which may have tricked Isaiah into thinking that this number is rational, when in fact it's not. Because it's irrational, we cannot represent it as a ratio of two integers (aka a fraction of integers).

whole numbers.

step-by-step explanation:

we are given the average monthly rainfall (in millimeters) model r(m) for the years 1900-2009 as a function of the month number m.

as we can see m is taken for the number of months for years 1900-2009.

we know that number of months can't be a negative number or decimal number or a fraction.

so, the number of months could be only positive whole numbers.

therefore, whole numbers is more appropriate for the domain of r.