On Thursday, September 26, 2013 11:48:58 AM UTC-4, Michael F. Stemper wrote: > On 09/26/2013 10:17 AM, Dan Christensen wrote: > > > On Thursday, September 26, 2013 10:54:14 AM UTC-4, dull...@sprynet.com wrote: > > >> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:24:54 -0700 (PDT), Dan Christensen > > >> <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote: > > > > >>> As taught in high schools and many university courses, 0^0 is undefined. > > > > >> Does the phrase "beating a dead horse" mean anything to you? > > > > > I don't think any other topic has inspired as much heated debate in online math forums, > > > > Lots of topics have generated similar amounts of debate in on-line > > math fora. For instance: > > - Does 0.999... = 1? > > - Is 1/0 = oo? > > - Short proofs of FLT > > - Do irrational numbers exist? > > - Do infinite sets exist? > > - Is the universe one big plutonium atom? > > - Can the reals and the naturals be bijected? > > - How can switching doors improve your odds in the Monty Hall game? >
All good fun, but this is not just a rehash of some crank theory. This is what I believe to be a new and much simpler rationale for a long-standing practice.