Date: Oct 21, 2013 6:37 AM
Author: Peter Percival
Subject: Re: Formal proof of the ambiguity of 0^0
Dan Christensen wrote:
> Well, at least you now seem to have come around to the fact that 0^0
> is ambiguous with two, if not infinitely many possibilities (which
> there are). But even with only two possibilities, you would still
> have to stipulate limits on the definition of 0 exponents. In a
> proof, you still wouldn't be able to refer to the value 0^0 because
> it isn't specified in the definition and it doesn't seem you can
> infer it.
Dan's definition of ^ doesn't allow the value of 0^0 to be inferred.
That is a big hint that the definition is inadequate.
The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here
Lincoln at Gettysburg