No, if it has a decimal place then its not an integer
No, 33 is an integer. 0.3333 repeating is a repeating decimal.
No.
No, it is an integer.
No, 6.57 repeating (often written as 6.57̅) is not an integer. An integer is a whole number, which can be positive, negative, or zero, without any decimal or fractional part. Since 6.57 repeating has a decimal component, it is classified as a rational number, not an integer.
0.999 repeating = 1 (the integer).
No, 33 is an integer. 0.3333 repeating is a repeating decimal.
No.
No, it is an integer.
No, it is an integer.
It can, since 0.999...=1. Therefore zero point nine repeating is an integer. Other repeating-decimal integers are 1.999..., 2.999...., -1.999..., etc.
No, 6.57 repeating (often written as 6.57̅) is not an integer. An integer is a whole number, which can be positive, negative, or zero, without any decimal or fractional part. Since 6.57 repeating has a decimal component, it is classified as a rational number, not an integer.
0.999 repeating = 1 (the integer).
No, -.5 repeating is not an integer because an integer is a whole number without decimals or fractions
A decimal number is like a mixed fraction: it has an integer part and a fractional part. If the fractional part is a repeating fraction then the whole number is represented by a repeating decimal.
4111 is an integer and so there is no sensible way to convert it into a repeating decimal.
89 is an integer, not a fraction. The repeated decimal equivalents are 89.000....(repeating) or 88.999... (repeating).
The latter which would be an irrational number that cannot be expressed as a fraction.