|
|
Re: 0^0=1
Posted:
May 8, 2012 3:39 PM
|
|
Ross writes:
> On May 8, 9:58 am, Butch Malahide <fred.gal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 7, 11:26 am, "LudovicoVan" <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote:
> >
> > > His posts make an interesting and competent reading on these
> > > matters, that's what I meant.
> >
> > For interesting and competent reading, I recommend Don Knuth's
> > article:
> >
> > http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/9205211v1.pdf
> >
> > Knuth's discussion of 0^0 and the uses of Libri's function
> > 0^(0^x), contained mostly on pp. 5-6 of that article, is much more
> > interesting and worth reading than anything I've seen here.
>
> The section on Wikipedia discussing the historical argument as to
> whether or not 0^0 should be defined as 1 looks remarkably similar
> to Knuth's discussion.
No accident. Wikipedia cites that paper. It also quotes the relevant
section of the book, Concrete Mathematics, in full.
|
|
