Date: Oct 30, 2013 7:56 PM
Author: Peter Percival
Subject: Re: Formal proof of the ambiguity of 0^0

Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 6:00:29 PM UTC-4, Peter Percival wrote:
>> Dan Christensen wrote:
>>
>>
>>

>>> 0^0 is an unspecified natural number.
>>
>>
>>
>> Specifying is a human activity. So there is Dan who hasn't specified
>>
>> it,

>
>
> I am in good company going back to, Cauchy himself.


I think I've asked you before if Cauchy was referring to natural number
exponentiation or real/complex exponentiation. I suspect the latter.

If x^y =df e^{y log x} then x = 0 is indeed problematic; but that isn't
the definition of natural number exponentiation.


--
What a piece of work is a man. How noble in reason, how infinite
in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable,
in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a God
Shakespeare through the mouth of Hamlet