Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote in news:40b1af00- firstname.lastname@example.org:
> Logically, only one definition of exponentiation on N is admissible: > > Exponentiation ^ on N as a binary function on N such that: > > 1. x^0 = 1 for x=/=0 (or, equivalently, x^2 = x*x) > 2. x^(y+1) = x^y * x > > Deny it if you like, Barty.
It's easy to deny self-contradictory nonsense. I laid out a simple choice for you to make. Somewhere, deep in your subconscious, below your insanity, you know that answering the question will break your "theory." So, naturally, your insanity kicks in, and you simply repeat old posts, rather than deal with the obvious flaws which have been pointed out repeatedly in your "theory."
Notice how, above, you are unable to stick to N or N_0, but dodge in and out as your insanity directs you, helping you avoid the harsh cold reality that you've produced nothing but contradictory crap.