- #1
Josh Swanson
- 19
- 0
[itex]0^0[/itex] (that is, if ^ is the exponentiation function, ^(0, 0)) is sometimes undefined. The only argument I've seen for this is that [itex]0^0[/itex] is an indeterminate form, though I don't accept that as an argument against defining ^(0, 0). It seems that [itex]0^0[/itex] could be interpreted as an indeterminate form or as ^(0, 0) = 1 depending on context without difficulty. On the other hand, I've found four good arguments for letting ^(0, 0) = 1: it makes the binomial theorem work out, it makes our notation for power series work out, it makes sense if m^n is the number of functions from an n-element set to an m-element set, and it follows from a natural definition of exponentiation via repeated products, using the empty product as 1.
So, is there any good argument for leaving it undefined?
So, is there any good argument for leaving it undefined?