2007-04-06 10:39:36 · 18 answers · asked by Solomon T 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Mathematics
IT CANNOT BE DEFINED
2007-04-06 18:53:02 · answer #1 · answered by ramsundar 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is no "smallest number". There isn't even a "smallest positive number".
You can prove this by logic. Suppose there IS in fact a smallest number. It would have to be negative, since all the negative numbers are less than zero which is less than all positive numbers. Let x stand for this number. But then x-1 would be smaller than the smallest number, which is by definition impossible. If you want to get cute and say that one minus the smallest number is the smallest number, then we have x-1=x which implies -1=0, which isn't true.
So there is no smallest number. We can do the same thing with positive numbers by considering x/2.
Somebody actually said "1 / googolplex" (and misspelling the word in the process). This implies that a googolplex (10^(10^100)) is the highest positive number, which is ridiculous. Half of this number would be smaller. There is no highest number, and there is no smallest number.
And ∞ is not a number either so before somebody posts "1 / ∞", let it be know that 1/∞ is not a number either, because "∞" is not a number. It's just a concept.
2007-04-06 10:41:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The smallest number is the least number in science and nature, which of any service to man, animals or nature in general! All this talk about infinite negative numbers is pointless! The smallest number is the smallest number used by both nature and man!! Whatever that number is! '0'? Nature does not use negative numbers to my knowledge, nature has no use for negative numbers! 1 x 10-24 is not smaller then zero!
2007-04-06 10:57:48 · answer #3 · answered by Old Truth Traveler 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no smallest number, but one thing for sure is that it is a negative...
2007-04-07 03:46:13 · answer #4 · answered by an vz 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1 is the smallest number because it only has one line. 8 is the biggest number because it has the most lines.
2007-04-06 10:46:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is no smaller number except for 0 that is.
I mean..if zero counts as a number.
2007-04-06 11:29:10 · answer #6 · answered by Hawaiian Surfer Girl 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
0 is the smallest number.
Because nothing can be more than zero right?
Even a negative is 0-a
Where a is a positive number
So it is -a MORE than zero
Zero.
2007-04-06 11:01:42 · answer #7 · answered by shantia_schwack 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
3 is a small number.
but not the smallest!
2007-04-06 10:51:03 · answer #8 · answered by }{PurpleLipz}{ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no smallest. it goes on, just like infinity
2007-04-06 10:47:29 · answer #9 · answered by Edags 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
zero has no value negative infinity is probably the number your looking for.
2007-04-06 11:05:33 · answer #10 · answered by dwinbaycity 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the mumber would be 1 over infinity or as a limit it would be 1 over n as n approaches infinity.
2007-04-06 10:47:16 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋