Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: 0^0=1
Replies: 145   Last Post: Jun 5, 2012 1:10 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Dan Christensen

Posts: 2,503
Registered: 7/9/08
Re: 0^0=1
Posted: Apr 25, 2012 10:53 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Apr 25, 4:06 pm, Jussi Piitulainen <jpiit...@ling.helsinki.fi>
wrote:
> Dan Christensen writes:
> > I have always seen exponentiation defined recursively for integer or
> > natural number exponents n as:

>
> > x^1 = x
> > x^(n+1)= x^n * x.

>
> > For integer n, and non-zero x, we have x^n=x^(n+1)/x. Thus x^0 = 1
> > for non-zero x and x^0 is left undefined for x=0.

>
> ...
>

> > > Division by zero is quite different. Zero cannot have a
> > > multiplicative inverse, call it w, because then we would have both
> > > 0*w = 0 (zero does that to any number) and 0*w = 1 (the
> > > multiplicative inverse does that to the number), which is a
> > > contradiction. I'm taking for granted that (a = b and a = c)
> > > implies a = c, and not 0 = 1.

>
> > Good point. x/y is is undefined for y=0. As a direct result, x^0 is
> > undefined for x=0 (see above).

>
> I make no such point.


Didn't you make the point x/y is undefined for y=0? If not, I
apologize.


> The failure to define x^0 by a rule that is not
> valid when x=0 is entirely yours, and only you are impressed by it.
>


As I recall, many sources leave 0^0 undefined.


> > > > (x+y)^n = x^n if y=0 and not x = n = 0
> > > >         = y^n if x=0 and not y = n = 0
> > > >         = 0 if x+y = 0 and n > 0
> > > >         = sum for k = 0, ..., n of C(n,k) x^k y^(n - k) if x =/= 0 and
> > > > y =/= 0 and not x+y = n = 0

>
> > > > (Have I covered all the cases?)
>
> ...
>

> > > My source says the theorem is "too important to be arbitrarily
> > > restricted", which is what happens when one leaves 0^0 undefined.

>
> > Too big to fail? I have argued here that BT does not require 0^0 to
> > be defined.

>
> No, "too important to be arbitrarily restricted".


[snip]

Do you think it is impossible to prove the binomial theorem with 0^0
being undefined?

Dan
Download my DC Proof 2.0 software at http://www.dcproof.com
Also see video demo


Date Subject Author
4/20/12
Read 0^0=1
Don H
4/20/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Virgil
4/20/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pubkeybreaker
4/20/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
J. Antonio Perez M.
4/20/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Richard Tobin
4/20/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Don H
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Peter Webb
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dave Dodson
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Peter Webb
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Don H
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Don H
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Bart Goddard
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Don H
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
J. Antonio Perez M.
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Bart Goddard
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Virgil
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pubkeybreaker
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dave Dodson
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pubkeybreaker
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pubkeybreaker
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
J. Antonio Perez M.
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Peter Webb
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
J. Antonio Perez M.
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pubkeybreaker
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ross Clement
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
exmathematician
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ki Song
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ki Song
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ki Song
5/10/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Stemper
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Butch Malahide
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ross Clement
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
5/7/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ross Clement
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Ki Song
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
David W. Cantrell
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
William Hale
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
5/9/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/10/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Stemper
5/10/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
5/9/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/9/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
5/9/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
5/10/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Stemper
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
5/8/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
5/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Press
5/28/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
address_is@invalid.invalid
5/28/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
address_is@invalid.invalid
6/5/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Press
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
David C. Ullrich
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
G. A. Edgar
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
David C. Ullrich
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Helmut Richter
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
LudovicoVan
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Richard Tobin
4/21/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Efftard K. Donglemeier
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Don H
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Bart Goddard
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
harold james
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Don H
4/24/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Bart Goddard
4/24/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/24/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pubkeybreaker
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Pfsszxt@aol.com
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Wally W.
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
J. Antonio Perez M.
4/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/24/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Rotwang
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
David W. Cantrell
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Rotwang
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/25/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Jussi Piitulainen
5/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Press
5/22/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Kaba
5/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Michael Press
4/23/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/26/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Repeating Rifle
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
jbriggs444@gmail.com
4/28/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Repeating Rifle
4/28/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dan Christensen
4/28/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Frederick Williams
4/28/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Tim Little
4/27/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
4/29/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
Dr J R Stockton
4/29/12
Read Re: 0^0=1
David W. Cantrell

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.