0
Roman Numerals
Questions and answers related to the symbols used by the ancient Romans to represent numbers. These include the numerals: I, V, X, L, C, D and M.
14,167 Questions
Because of the changes made to the rules now governing the Roman numeral system introduced during the Middle Ages nowadays 1999, 19 and 199 when converted into Roman numerals are now configured as MCMXCIX, XIX and CXCIX respectively which restricts some sort of sensible arithmetical interaction amongst them.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned inasmuch that there exist historical evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have added together the given numbers in either of the following formats:-
A: IMM+IXX+ICC = MMCCXVII => (2000-1)+(20-1)+(200-1) = 2217.
B: MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII+XVIIII = MMXVIII => 1999+19 = 2018.
MMXVIII+CLXXXXVIIII = MMCCXVII => 2018+199 = 2217.
Note that the above calculations are fairly simple and straightforward to work out but for more complicated calculations the Romans would have used an abacus calculating device.
QED
What is 111 times 16 showing all work from start to finish in Roman numerals with explanations?
When at school you are taught that in long multiplication to multiply the units follow by the 10s followed by the 100s followed by the 1000s ... etc or vice versa and then add them up to gain their product but in Roman numerals it is a lot simpler because there are no 0 digits to be bothered about as the following shows:-
X*CXI+V*CXI+I*CXI = MCX+DLV+CXI = MDCCLXXVI
Which means: 10*111+5*111+1*111 = 1110+555+111 = 1776
What will be the total number of different symbol for the number of system with base 3?
The digits used in a counting system to the base 3 are 0, 1 and 2.
EXAMPLE : 11 to the base 3 is 102 ( 1x32 + 0x3 + 2) : 5 to the base 3 is 12.
The equivalent of 1776 and 223 converted into Roman numerals are MDCCLXXVI and CCXXIII respectively and under todays rules they officially add up to MCMXCIX which is supposed to be the equivalent of 1999.
But the ancient Romans would have probably calculated these numerals together on an abacus counting board as MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII which is the equivalent of 1999 and by placing I to both sides of these numerals systematically reduced them to IMM which is the equivalent of 2000-1 = 1999.
The real rules governing the original Roman numeral system were changed during the Middle Ages presumably to make the system more compatible friendly with the Hindu-Arabic numeral system that was gradually being introduced into Western Europe at the time.
QED by David Gambell
MISTAKEN is the answer for this puzzle: * letters 1234 are MIST (climate condition)
* letters 678 are KEN (a name) * letters 478 are TEN (a number) * letters 1457 are MTAE (can be rearranged to spell MATE, a challenge in chess games.)
Why is there no Egyptian symbol for zero?
Like many systems, you either have some of something, or you don't. If you do, you use a number for it. If not, no number is required. What is the point of saying "Hi fred, I own 0 Rolls Royces?"
Notwithstanding the fact that nowadays we would officially convert 1999 into Roman numerals as MCMXCIX inasmuch that the ancient Romans would have probably worked out the equivalent of 1999 as MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII which can be abridged to IMM thus making two possibilities of adding together the equivalent of these numbers as follows:-
A: IMM+MM+MMI = (VI) => (2000-1)+2000+2001 = 6000
B: MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII+MM+MMI = (VI) => 1999+2000+2001 = 6000
Note that the above calculations are fairly simple but for more advanced calculations the ancient Romans would have made use of an abacus calculating device and that (VI) is equivalent to 1000*6 = 6000 which is the same as MMMMMM
How would you actually add together 19 199 and 1999 using Roman numerals in two different ways?
The rules appertaining to the correct usage of Roman numerals have waxed and waned over the past thousand years inasmuch that today we would convert 19, 199 and 1999 into Roman numerals as XIX, CXCIX and MCMXCIX respectively which makes addition operations with them quite difficult if not possible at all.
Furthermore the origins of the Roman numeral system had nothing to do with the Romans because the idea of this system of numeracy was first conceived by a mysterious tribe of people known as the Etruscans who once ruled the Romans and within the contraints of mathematical reasoning would have probably calculated the above numerals in either of the following formats:-
IXX+ICC = CCXVIII (20-1)+(200-1) = (218)
CCXVIII+IMM = MMCCXVII (218)+(2000-1) = (2217)
Alternatively:-
XVIIII+CLXXXXVIIII = CCXVII (19)+(199) = (218)
CCXVIII+MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII = MMCCXVII (218)+(1999) = (2217)
Note that: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M
Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1
QED
The way we notate Roman numerals today differs in many respects in which the Romans actually did themselves. For instance although we notate 1776 today correctly as MDCCLXXVI we would notate 444 as CDXLIV which makes it almost impossible for them to integrate with other numerals in some kind of plausible progressive mathematical manner.
But the Romans in reality would have worked out the equivalent of 444 as CCCCXXXXIIII which can be methodically reduced to IVLD yet retaining its original numerical value thus facilatating the speed and ease of addition as follows:-
MDCCLXXVI+IVLD = MMCCXX (1776)+(500-56) = (2220)
Note that if: -IVL+D = CCCCXXXXIIII
Then it follows that: D = CCCCXXXXIIII+LVI
Alternatively:-
MDCCLXXVI+CCCCXXXXIIII = MMCCXX (1776)+(444) = (2220)
Note that: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M
Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1
QED
Today we would convert the Hindu-Arabic numerals of 444 into Roman numerals as CDXLIV which makes it quite difficult to carry out any kind of mathematical operations with them.
But in the past the Romans themselves would have calculated the equivalent of 444 as CCCCXXXXIIII which can be systematically reduced with applied logic to IVLD (500-56) thus enabling the speed and ease of subtraction to be carried out as follows:-
MDCCLXXVI-IVLD = MCCCXXXII (1776)-(-56+500) = (1332)
Alternatively by cancelling out the applicable numerals:-
MDCCLXXVI-CCCCXXXXIIII = MCCCXXXII (1776)-(444) = (1332)
Note that: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M
Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1
QED
The rules now governing the Roman numeral system as we know them today had nothing to do with the Romans because they were introduced during the Middle ages but there exist credible evidence to show that the ancient Romans would have worked out all four calculations in the following formats:-
MDCCLXXVI+SXC = MDCCCLXVS => 1776+(100-10.5) = 1865.5
MDCCLXXVI+LXXXVIIIIS = MDCCCLXVS => 1776+89.5 = 1865.5
MDCCLXXVI-SXC = MDCLXXXVIS => 1776-(100-10.5) = 1686.5
MDCCLXXVI-LXXXVIIIIS = MDCLXXXVIS => 1776-89.5 = 1686.5
Note that in mathematics -(100-10.5) becomes 10.5-100 and that the above calculations were fairly simple and straightforward to work out but for more complicated calculations the Romans would have used an abacus calculating device.
QED
Nowadays the equivalent of 9, 19 and 1999 converted into Roman numerals are officially IX, XIX and MCMXCIX respectively.
But back in ancient Rome the equivalent of 9, 19 and 1999 would have been calculated on an abacus counting device as follows:-
VIIII+XVIIII = XXVIII => 9+19 = 28
XXVIII+MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII = MMXXVII => 28+1999 = 2027
Alternatively in an abridged format:-
IX+IXX = XXVIII => (10-1)+(20-1) = 28
XXVIII+IMM = MMXXVII => 28+(2000-1) = 2027
QED by David Gambell
What are 26 facts and features relevant to the ancient Roman numeral system from A to Z?
1 Addition, subtraction, division and multiplication was once simple and easy
2 Brackets were once used to increase the value of numerals
3 C is the equivalent of 100
4 D is the equivalent of 500
5 Etruscans ruled the Romans and they first conceived this numeracy system
6 Fourteen was once XIIII or IXV but now it's XIV
7 Grand in slang means 1000 which is the equivalent of M
8 Hundred and ninety-nine was once ICC instead of CXCIX
9 I is the equivalent of 1
10 Jupiter god of the Romans was why they never wrote out 4 as IV
11 Known ways of expressing these numerals correctly can still be found today
12 L is the equivalent of 50
13 Middle Ages was when rules governing the original system were changed
14 Ninety-nine was once IC instead of XCIX
15 Octoginta means LXXX which is 80
16 Prime numbers are also found in Roman numerals
17 Quindecim is Latin for XV which is 15 in Hindu-Arabic numerals
18 Roman numerals are the numerical element of the Latin language
19 S is the equivalent of a half
20 Triginta means XXX which is 30
21 Undeviginti is Latin for IXX which is now XIX for 19
22 V is the equivalent of 5
23 Worldwide usage of the system still continues today
24 X is the equivalent of 10
25 Years are notated with them to disguise the dates of production of movies and TV programs
26 Zero wasn't needed because the positional place value of these numerals are self evident
QED by David Gambell
What are the two methods of actually adding together 19 29 and 52 using only Roman numerals?
c
Additional Information:-
Under today's rules we would convert 19 and 29 into Roman numerals as XIX and XXIX which makes any form of interaction between other numerals quite difficult.
But there is evidence to suggest that the Romans themselves would have actually worked out the equivalent of 19 and 29 as XVIIII and XXVIIII then simplified them to IXX and IXXX which uses less numerals but of equal value thus making addition quicker and simpler as follows:-
IXX+IXXX = IIL (20-1)+(30-1) = (50-2)
IIL+LII = C (50-2)+52 = 100
Alternatively:-
XVIIII+XXVIIII = XXXXVIII (19+29 = 48)
XXXXVIII+LII = C (48+52 = 100)
Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1
Remember that: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M
Quod Erat Demonstrandum
