First of all, there's no way it could possibly be, simply because there's
no such thing as an 'interger'.
Next ... an integer never has anything but zeroes after the decimal point.
-13 is an integer.
It is a special case of multiplication by a positive integer.
89 is an integer, not a fraction. The repeated decimal equivalents are 89.000....(repeating) or 88.999... (repeating).
-13/100
To find the integer represented by 13 positive tiles and 26 negative tiles, you can subtract the number of negative tiles from the number of positive tiles. This calculation is (13 - 26), which equals (-13). Therefore, the integer represented is (-13).
-13 is an integer.
-13 is already an integer. It corresponds to the absolute value 13.
Integer.
It is a special case of multiplication by a positive integer.
13
-13 is rational and an integer.
89 is an integer, not a fraction. The repeated decimal equivalents are 89.000....(repeating) or 88.999... (repeating).
-13/100
No, it is an integer.
2x + 1 is equal to or less than 13.
To the nearest integer, 13
Yes, all negative whole numbers, including -13, are integers.