That doesn't make sense. "Predecessor" and "successor" are defined for whole numbers, not for decimal numbers.
The whole numbers are all numbers zero and up (including zero ).
Natural numbers, which were around before the concept of negative numbers
Integers
Negative integers are whole numbers but not natural numbers. Mathematicians are undecided about zero. It is a whole number: some believe zero is a natural number, others do not.
Every integer has a predecessor and a succesor. If you mean NON-NEGATIVE whole numbers, the answer would be zero.
There are different schools of thought on this, but I maintain that whole numbers start with zero.
Yes, the number zero. Currently, the natural numbers are normally taken to start with zero, not with one (this was not always so). The number zero has no predecessor in the set of natural numbers. In the set of integers, however, every number has a predecessor and a successor.
That doesn't make sense. "Predecessor" and "successor" are defined for whole numbers, not for decimal numbers.
The predecessor of 1 is 0. If you define "natural numbers" as starting at 1, then 1 has no predecessor. (Natural numbers can be defined either to include, or to exclude, zero.)
The whole numbers are all numbers zero and up (including zero ).
Natural numbers, which were around before the concept of negative numbers
Zero (0) is in the set of whole number. The only difference between the set of whole numbers and counting numbers is that the whole numbers contain zero. {0,1,2,3...}
diponmjoddo hifa ufdf ufjdind jokpiheh hyho uh jobnkndpejljofe
Natural numbers consist of the set of all whole numbers greater than zero.
When the whole numbers are negative.
Integers