Oz ,'Beneath You'
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risque (and frisque), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
Actually, 0^0 =1, right
I will *never* understand this, or the idea that 0*0 = 1.
So you've got some nothing. You raise it to the power of nothing (or multiply it by nothing), effectively giving nothing even more nothing. Suddenly you've got something? Where did it come from!? Dear God, WHERE?
This is why I'm not a creationist, isn't it?
Huh. There is debate on the subject:
ZERO TO THE ZERO POWER. Most textbook writers either leave 0^0 undefined, or state that it is undefined. Others say it should be defined as 1. Euler argued for 0^0 = 1; Cauchy considered it undefined. Most calculators give "error" for this expression, although some give "1."
As Euler goes, so goes my nation.
Ok, the Windows XP calculator says 0^0 is 1. What does the Mac OS X one say?
I am procrastinating about getting dressed. Need to go to the store for eggs and bread, and also swing by work to sign a thing I forgot to sign when I filled it out. Don't wanna get dressed. On the other hand? I made soup this morning, in the crockpot. The one Daniel found in a free pile.
This page is interesting [link]
This page attempts to show some of the ambiguities in defining some of the mathematical terms that might be encountered at the high school level. A number of these issues may seem quite trivial, and some are the result of consulting out-of-date texts. But many of these issues have led to disputed answers in mathematics competitions. Contributions and suggestions are welcome.
I think that 0^0=1 is one of those things where defining in that way makes a lot of theorems work out much more nicely; if 0^0 were anything but one, then a lot of theorems and proofs would be much less elegant.
Maths should be elegant.
Linux (or the KDE calculator) says not a number.
Bill Gates / Linus Torvalds 0^0 smackdown!
(although Linus has nothing to do with KDE.)