Typically use use the Roman numeral with a metal after a metal in an ionic compound to indicate which ion is indicated in the compound. The reason for this is that many metals can form more than one kind of ion. For example, copper can form Cu+ ions or Cu2+ ions, and iron can form Fe2+ ions and Fe3+ ions.
Roman numerals are typically used in compound names to indicate the oxidation state of an element. This is necessary when the element can have multiple oxidation states and is written as a cation in the compound. For example, iron can exist in the +2 or +3 oxidation state, so the compound name "iron(II) chloride" specifies that it is the +2 oxidation state of iron.
For the transition metals, the roman numeral designates the valence number of the metal in the ionic bond. For example CuSO4 is Copper (II) Sulfate, because the copper has a valence of +2 in this bond.
VII.XXV.MMV
its a math problem
there is no roman numeral for itAnother answer: The Romans had no numeral to represent zero because there was no need for a zero in their system. We have 9 numbers plus the zero symbol. We add a zero on to the end of a number to convert it to tens and two zeros to convert it to hundreds and so on. The Romans simply had different symbols for tens and hundreds. For example we would write 1, 10, 20, 40, 50, 100 and 200 but the same numbers as Roman numerals would be I, X, XX, XL, L, C and CC, done quite simply with no need for a zero. In the middle ages monks, who still used Roman numerals and wrote in Latin, began to used the symbol N to represent zero (from the Latin Nullae meaning nothing).
In Roman numerals, negative numbers are not represented. The Roman numeral system was not designed to include negative numbers; it primarily represents positive integers. If you need to represent a value less than zero, you would need to use another numeral system, such as the Arabic numeral system used today.
For the transition metals, the roman numeral designates the valence number of the metal in the ionic bond. For example CuSO4 is Copper (II) Sulfate, because the copper has a valence of +2 in this bond.
VII.XXV.MMV
its a math problem
there is no roman numeral for itAnother answer: The Romans had no numeral to represent zero because there was no need for a zero in their system. We have 9 numbers plus the zero symbol. We add a zero on to the end of a number to convert it to tens and two zeros to convert it to hundreds and so on. The Romans simply had different symbols for tens and hundreds. For example we would write 1, 10, 20, 40, 50, 100 and 200 but the same numbers as Roman numerals would be I, X, XX, XL, L, C and CC, done quite simply with no need for a zero. In the middle ages monks, who still used Roman numerals and wrote in Latin, began to used the symbol N to represent zero (from the Latin Nullae meaning nothing).
In Roman numerals, negative numbers are not represented. The Roman numeral system was not designed to include negative numbers; it primarily represents positive integers. If you need to represent a value less than zero, you would need to use another numeral system, such as the Arabic numeral system used today.
The numeral "XXXVX" is not a valid Roman numeral. Roman numerals use a combination of letters to represent numbers, with specific rules for subtracting and adding values. The correct representation for the number 35 in Roman numerals is "XXXV."
The preferred nomenclature is ALWAYS the Roman numeral form, since it's clear and unambiguous even if the reader does not know the common oxidation states of that metal. For example: to be able to write the formula for "cuprous sulfate" you need to know that copper's common oxidation states are +1 and +2, but it's immediately obvious that copper (I) sulfate should be written Cu2SO4.
The number 6 is represented by the Roman numeral VI (V = 5 + I =1).Five is represented by V and you need to add one or the I. So six would be shown as VI.
there are no more after M because M is 1000 and that is all we need.
It was their only recognisible number system like our Arabic-numeral system (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)
The Roman numeral system doesn't need a zero symbol for positional place value purposes because the positional place values of its numerals are self evident
For the same reasons that we need a numeracy system today which is based on the Hindu-Arabic numeral system that was a lot easier than the Roman numeral system that it replaced.