Re: 0^0
- From: David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:29:25 +0200
"john" <primefinder@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> It appears to me that the most appropriate way to define 0^0 is
> exactly the same as 0/0.
Why?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
.
Relevant Pages
- Re: MINI FAQ von de.rec.outdoors [2005-11-24]
... David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. ... 15, 44793 Bochum ... Prev by Date: ...
(de.rec.outdoors) - Re: Error in definition of fnpara.tex set of macros
... David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. ... 15, 44793 Bochum ... UKTUG FAQ: ...
(comp.text.tex) - Re: mathematical analysis
... David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. ... 15, 44793 Bochum ... Prev by Date: ...
(sci.math) - Re: Wetterbedingungen?
... David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. ... 15, 44793 Bochum ... Prev by Date: ...
(de.rec.alpinismus) - Re: infinity
... David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. ... 15, 44793 Bochum ... Prev by Date: ...
(sci.math) |
|
