You are Here: Home >< Maths

# n^n

Announcements Posted on
Why bother with a post grad? Are they even worth it? Have your say! 26-10-2016
1. (Original post by dugdugdug)
But I thought the beauty of maths is that there is no ambiguity, with there ever only being one universal answer to a problem or are we delving into the higher echelons?
We only say that 0^0=1 because thats how we have defined it, the definition of exponents doesn't cover the cases of 0^0 so we have to extend its definition, however depending on what sort of maths we are doing it makes sense to use a more appropriate definition.

It's a bit like when we extend multiplication to vectors, we have to change the definition to make it fit our new maths.
2. (Original post by james22)
We only say that 0^0=1 because thats how we have defined it, the definition of exponents doesn't cover the cases of 0^0 so we have to extend its definition, however depending on what sort of maths we are doing it makes sense to use a more appropriate definition.

It's a bit like when we extend multiplication to vectors, we have to change the definition to make it fit our new maths.
So I suppose it's a bit like defining n! as nx(n-1)x(n-2)x ..... x 3x2x1 for convenience because we know n! exists for non-integers.
3. (Original post by dugdugdug)
But I thought the beauty of maths is that there is no ambiguity, with there ever only being one universal answer to a problem or are we delving into the higher echelons?
maths is a human activity, isn't it?
4. (Original post by dugdugdug)
But I thought the beauty of maths is that there is no ambiguity, with there ever only being one universal answer to a problem or are we delving into the higher echelons?
Sorry to disappoint. Maths is about exploring consequences of assumptions; if two strands of maths use different assumptions then their consequences need not agree.

Edit: To make my point clearer, it makes no sense to ask what something is unless you say (or it's already understood) how it's defined. If I asked what was equal to then it wouldn't make any sense unless I defined what I meant by that string of symbols, and is no different. It's sometimes convenient to define something which is written in the same way to mean two different things in mathematics. If are ordinal numbers (or cardinal numbers, or sets) and we're working in the context of set theory then it's useful to define in terms of sets of functions. But if are (real or) complex numbers and we're working in the context of (real or) complex analysis then it's usual to define where and (and is defined as usual for real numbers). And if are natural numbers and we're teaching exponentiation to schoolchildren then we'd want to ignore all the technicalities above and say that is what you get when you multiply by itself times. What do you get when you multiply 0 by itself 0 times? (The answer is: it really depends what you mean by "multiplying zero", and by "multiplying [something] zero times".)

So can be what you want it to be, as long as you define it appropriately and your definition is consistent with whatever you choose to do with it.

## Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
1. this can't be left blank
2. this can't be left blank
3. this can't be left blank

6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

4. this can't be left empty
1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register

Updated: April 5, 2012
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Today on TSR

### University open days

Is it worth going? Find out here

Poll
Useful resources

### Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read here first

### How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

### Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams