"Given that he's speaking of whole numbers, the number zero comes to mind, which satisfies this. So his whole proof is shot." Both Wikipedia [1] and Wolfram [2

"Given that he's speaking of whole numbers, the number zero comes to mind, which satisfies this. So his whole proof is shot." Both Wikipedia [1] and Wolfram [2] indicate that there are varying interpretations regarding which integers are included in the definition of the term whole number. Since Conway is discussing two-dimensional distance in order to determine area, his definition of the term would not include integers that are less than or equal to zero. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_number http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_number "Whole number is a term with inconsistent definitions by different authors. All distinguish whole numbers from fractions and numbers with fractional parts. Whole numbers may refer to: natural numbers in sense (1, 2, 3, ...) - the positive integers natural numbers in sense (0, 1, 2, 3, ...) - the non-negative integers all integers (..., -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, ...)" [2] http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WholeNumber.html http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WholeNumber.html "0 is sometimes included in the list of "whole" numbers (Bourbaki 1968, Halmos 1974), but there seems to be no general agreement."