I just voted for 1 mainly for economic reasons, :). I'm sure that the amount of time wasted considering this question (thousands if not millions of dollars, my sources Messers I. and P. News inform me) has far outweighed the effort in just working around defining it to have one value.
The precident for this kind of agrument is that the null graph is now almost universally not considered a graph, mainly because almost no graph theorems applied to it, so it was considered a waste of time and ink, :).
We can't allow ourselves to be paralysed by choice, or we'll never get our flying cars or rocket suits! Therefore: one.
That's a good point. Particularly given what happened to Arianne Five when it did just that. Equally, though, I guess, that all the rocket-suit manufacturers are assuming the same value for 0^0 than each having their own, in the style of the famous lb/in^2,N mixup at JPL.
I sometimes wonder if the space industry exists primarily to keep comp.risks full of interesting articles.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
The precident for this kind of agrument is that the null graph is now almost universally not considered a graph, mainly because almost no graph theorems applied to it, so it was considered a waste of time and ink, :).
We can't allow ourselves to be paralysed by choice, or we'll never get our flying cars or rocket suits! Therefore: one.
no subject
no subject
I sometimes wonder if the space industry exists primarily to keep comp.risks full of interesting articles.