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, it is 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
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, 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.
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.
If you convert them into decimal form you can say there are terminating decimals, there are the integers, and there are repeating decimals. EX: 2.4 is a terminating decimal. 2.44444444... is a repeating decimal. 2 is an integer. all are rational numbers.