Re: Suggestion for 2.5 (correction)
Sorry, there was a typo in my previous post!
Hi Christian,
you wrote:
> From: Martin Stachon <martin.stachon at worldonline.cz>
[...]
>> Some other indeterminate forms are :
[...]
>> 0^0 (although MS Windows Calculator says 0^0=1, my Casio says "Math error"
>> 
>
> 1 is correct, because epsilon^0 is always 1.
[...]
I disagree. It also could be said that 0^0 = 0, because 0^x = 0.
It cannot be decided, which of both rules _generally_ is "better":
"0^0 is undefined. Defining 0^0 = 1 allows some formulas to be expressed
simply (Knuth 1997, p. 56), although the same could be said for the
alternate definition 0^0 = 0 (Wells 1986, p. 26)."
[http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Zero.html]
corrected --------------^
> CChris
Best regards,
Juergen
--
/"\ ASCII ribbon campain | while not asleep do
\ / against HTML in | sheep += 1
X e-mail and news, | end while
/ \ and unneeded MIME |
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
