Is infinite considered to be an integer?
109332
that's right. cause infinit is indefinit.
1043253
A negative number may be an integer, but not a whole number.\n\nWhole numbers are "counting numbers" starting with zero: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, . . .\nIntegers are everything without a decimal point: . . . -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, . . .\n1934234 is a whole number and an integer\n-36 is an integer, but not a whole number\n27.5 and -3.12 are neither whole numbers nor integers
512112
Since you can always add 1 more to an number, there IS no biggest number.\nIn mathematics, it is even possible to add 1 to infinity.
633045
The answer that others have offered (that the square root of infinity is infinity) is not really helpful, I think.  The problem is that infinity is not a number, but a direction, like "east," or to use a more mathematical term, like "less." It makes no sense to ask for the square root of infinity (or how big is "infinity plus one," or anything else that that treats infinity as a specific number). \n\nJust to confuse things a little, however, there is such a thing as "degrees of infinity."  ;-)
907894
Uh, the whole thing falls down in part 6. Infinity is not a number. Its a limit.
340469
The amount of real numbers AND the amount of integers are both infinite.  Therefore, I there are an infinite number of integers and an infinite number of real numbers, so the answer to your question would be YES.  (Both are infinite) \nAnother way to look at it, however, is between the numbers 1 and 2 (2 consecutive integers) there can be an infinite amount of real numbers.  In this light you one might argue that there are more real numbers than integers.
722299
Infinite? I am not sure if you meant real things like people, sand, etc. or abstract things - but here goes:\n\nthe set of integers\nthe set of even integers\nthe number of numbers (or fractions) between 0 and 1\nthe line\nan infinite loop in computer programming
157677
This question cannnot be answered due to a simple fact that there are infinite amounts of numbers, therefore is no limit to a higher or a lower number.
343556
Yes, there are variou sizes of infinity. These numbers are collectively known as transfinite numbers.\n\nThe set of all integers and the set of all squares are in a 1-to-1 correspondence with one another, and both are infinite., Both are aleph-null, in Cantor's terms. But there is a bigger infinity aleph-one, the set of all real numbers, for example, has aleph-one members.
664717
I'm not sure what you are asking, but yes, there are an infinite number of numbers between 1 and 0.  \n\nIn fact, the whole numbers are the smallest group of infinities on the number line.  The infinite set of irrational numbers far exceed the whole numbers.\n\nTherefore, if you were to have all of the numbers on a number line, and you were to throw a dart, the probability of you hitting a whole number with that dart is basically zero!
203743
SpawnOfSpock, the fact that there are an infinite amount of numbers does not imply there are also an infinite amount of primes. It is a serious enough question to have been proven in myriad ways by some of the greatest mathematicians.\nThe following is a common one. Suppose there were a finite amount of primes. Then the product p of all these primes is divisible by each prime. Consider the number p+1. Since p+1 was not in the set, it must be divisible by a prime number. Let that prime be s. But (p+1)/s = q + 1/s for some integer q and thus p+1 must also be prime. Thus our assumption that the set of all primes is finite must be wrong.
293980
an Integer and an int are not the same object.  try int x = Integer.intValue();  where Integer is the name of your Integer
2548
****Edit to clarify******\nWhile the professor below is correct, and the poster below him is partially correct, you can only assume that the course is complete if you include the finite answer as an infinate series.\n\nThe prime example of this is that 1.999 repeating is NOT equal to 2.0 unless 2.0 is infinite, ie 2.000000 repeating.  You can not deal with unlike in infinate numbers.  Ie, you can not translate an infinite number to a finite number and still have the same premise.  \n\nSo unless the data deals with an infinate equality, the runner never will reach his destination.\n*********end edit***********\n\nWhile it is true that the runner will finish the course, as we know that every course has a start and ending point; in regards to math, unless the start and end are constants and predefined, the answer is simple:  THe runner will never reach the end.  The reason for this is that without a predefined set of start and end, the course is continous.
564541
I would say infinite.\n\nBECAUSE...\nSome square roots are irrational numbers e.g. root 2.\n\nThe bases which give a root between 0 and 1, lie between 0 and 1.\n\nThere are an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1 because you can go to infinite numbers of decimals.\n\nHope you get what I'm saying!
161998
There are several attitudes to infinity. The most basic definition of an infinite object is simple:"anything that is not finite." To picture something that is infinite. Imagine on a the number line, a number that is defined to be greater than any other real number, and call it the sideways 8. Such a number, by virtue of its definiton is not finite, because it is greater than any finite real number.\nAnother approach to infinity is through limits.\nWhen we say that something approaches infinity, it means that something is greater than any real number.\nAnd finally types of infinity. The natural numbers and the rational numbers are of the same type of infinity. The irrational and the real numbers are of a "stronger" type of infinity, the number of all functions is even a greater type of infinity. The types of infinity are really determined through comparison with each other, in the theory of sets.\nInfinity is a very big subject and this short explanation doesn't satisfy it. The approach I recommend on your son's homework is to take a few ideas from different fields, and give brief examples to each idea if he can. The teacher shouldn't be asking for more than that. Hope that helps.
610549
Both have infinite numbers so both are big and equal
264849
I vote for infinity, because when studied one finds out that it is even more puzzling and contradictory than it appears on the surface.\n\nGeorg Cantor, listed in a previous answer, proved some very surprising things about infinity. In fact Cantor's work lead to set theory, which most students have seen to some degree, even in high school.\n\nHere's a few commonly taught items about infinite that Cantor discovered:\n\n+ There are various degrees of infinity, not just one.\n\n+ The two most commonly described degrees of infinity are countably infinite and uncountably infinite. Countably infinite means that all elements in that set map to the set of integers. Uncoutably infinite means that there are even more in that set than there are integers.\n\n+ Rational numbers, i.e., fractions, are countably infinite. That means there's a one-to-one mapping between fractions and integers. (Dove-Tail Proof)\n\n+ Real numbers, i.e., includes all [non-repeating] decimals are uncountably infinite. That means there are more reals than rationals even if both sets are infinite. (Diagonalization Proof)\n\n+ Buy using a set theory technique, the set of infinte sets can be grown to even "larger" sets of infinity. In fact, there's an infinite degree of infinite sets.\n\nCantor also had a hypothesis that there was no set of size in between the basic countable and uncountable degrees of infinity, but he couldn't prove it, and it turns out for good reason. Well after his death, other mathematicians proved that his continuum hypothesis could not be proven nor disproven, but that starts to open up a whole new can of worms.