'Heart Of Gold'
[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.
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 A number of these issues may seem quite trivial, and some are the result of consulting out-of-date texts.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.)
What does the Mac OS X one say?
OX X says 1.