4
$\begingroup$

My textbook explains that the power series: $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} x^{n}/n!$ converges for $x=0$ because the terms of the series get the value 0.

My problem with this argument is the first term, which is $0^{0}$. But this is undefined? Someone who can explain this?

  • 6
    The first term is taken to be $1$ for all $x$. A less compact way of writing the series is $$1 + \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{x^n}{n!},$$ since it is the Taylor series of $e^x$, so the constant term is $f(0) = e^0 = 1$.2012-05-27
  • 1
    This convention is nearly universally observed to prevent the awkwardness Arturo has described.2012-05-27
  • 0
    Great! I found the errata of the book and it was a mistake.2012-05-27
  • 0
    possible duplicate of [Zero to the zero power - Is $0^0=1$?](http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/11150/zero-to-the-zero-power-is-00-1)2013-06-08
  • 0
    People sometimes believe that $0^0$ can't be defined because they feel that a discontinuity is the same thing as a contradiction. In case you're wondering in which contexts you can replace $0^0$ by $1$, there is an easy to remember rule for that: It's always OK.2017-02-16

3 Answers 3

6

In the context described in the question, it is a convention that $0^0 = 1$.

1

In a power series, $x^n$ is not exponentiation operation on real numbers. Instead, it uses a different exponentiation operation; e.g. repeated multiplication suffices for this purpose. Therefore, $x^0=1$ identically.

Of course, most people don't like to pay attention to this level of detail in syntax, so they just treat $x^0=1$ when $x=0$ as a convention.

0

There are calculus books that say that $0^0$ is undefined. The reason for this is tradition; long ago, before continuous functions were well understood, Cauchy placed $0^0$ in a table of "indeterminate forms", a concept that becomes obsolete once you know the relation between limits and continuous functions.

There are numerous places in mathematics where $0^0$ is implicitly assumed to be 1. So if you want consistency, then $0^0$ must be defined as 1.

Some people say that sometimes 0 is better and sometimes 1 is better, but this is not true, the value 0 is never useful, and the value 1 never leads to contradictions.

  • 1
    Welcome to MSE. I feel compelled to point out that your usage of "never" seems at odds with the customary mathematical definition. How does $$\lim_{x\to 0} (e^{-k/x^{2}})^{x^{2}} = e^{-k}, k \geq 0 \text{ arbitrary},$$fit into your linguistic scheme?2014-04-17
  • 0
    Setting $0^0 = 1$ never leads to contradictions if you follow the rules of mathematics (if you believe that a discontinuity is the same thing as a contradiction then all bets are off).2017-02-16