
Re: Formal proof of the ambiguity of 0^0
Posted:
Nov 17, 2013 3:36 PM


On Sunday, November 17, 2013 3:22:51 PM UTC5, Julio Di Egidio wrote: > "Dan Christensen" <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote in message > > news:aef9b03ae67f47659f67cb591a98b1cb@googlegroups.com... > > > On Sunday, November 17, 2013 2:55:58 PM UTC5, Julio Di Egidio wrote: > > >> "Dan Christensen" <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote in message > > >> news:668d009ce06b4e3c857186a92e5375c5@googlegroups.com... > > >> > > >> > I have formally proven that for all x0 in N (including 0), there exists > > >> > an > > >> > exponentlike functions ^ such that: > > >> > > >> Such that "any number works": exactly what I had explained. > > > > > > That's pretty much what we mean by 0^0 being undefined. > > > > No, it is not, which has been the main objection all along. >
Let's face it, you have more or less ruled out 0^0 being undefined. There is no convincing you.
Dan Download my DC Proof 2.0 software at http://www.dcproof.com Visit my new math blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

