Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote in news:firstname.lastname@example.org:
>> The point, as I've said repeatedly, is that your >> "theorem" assumes that it has a value. If it's not >> defined, then it has no value (or meaning.) > > > 0^0 is undefined in the same sense that the number x is undefined in > 0*x = 0. Any value works in both cases.
That's hardly "undefined." Maybe "indeterminate" is what you're looking for. In which case, all this "theorem and proof and rigor" of yours is vacuous. We've known how to deal rigorously with indeterminates for centuries.